I followed him into a spacious venue packed with nearly 400 people painting faces, filling in coloring books, and wrapping yarn around chopsticks. Despite the cheerful summer-camp atmosphere, the event was a reminder of the binary choice facing smartphone owners, who, according to one study, consult their device 150 times a day:



Leave the WMD on and deal with relentless prompts compelling them to check its screen, or else completely disconnect. “It doesn’t have to be the all-or-nothing choice,” Harris told me after taking in the arts-and-crafts scene. “That’s a design failure.”

Harris is the closest thing Silicon Valley has to a conscience. As the co‑founder of Time Well Spent, an advocacy group, he is trying to bring moral integrity to software design: essentially, to persuade the tech world to help us disengage more easily from its devices.

While some blame our collective tech addiction on personal failings, like weak willpower, Harris points a finger at the software itself. That itch to glance at our phone is a natural reaction to apps and websites engineered to get us scrolling as frequently as possible.

The attention economy, which showers profits on companies that seize our focus, has kicked off what Harris calls a “race to the bottom of the brain stem.”

“You could say that it’s my responsibility” to exert self-control when it comes to digital usage, he explains, “but that’s not acknowledging that there’s a thousand people on the other side of the screen whose job is to break down whatever responsibility I can maintain.”

In short, we’ve lost control of our relationship with technology because technology has become better at controlling us.

A “Hippocratic oath” for software designers would stop the exploitation of people’s psychological vulnerabilities.

Under the auspices of Time Well Spent, Harris is leading a movement to change the fundamentals of software design. He is rallying product designers to adopt a “Hippocratic oath” for software that, he explains, would check the practice of:

“Exposing people’s psychological vulnerabilities” and restore “agency” to users. “There needs to be new ratings, new criteria, new design standards, new certification standards,” he says. “There is a way to design based not on addiction.”

Joe Edelman - who did much of the research informing Time Well Spent’s vision and is the co-director of a think tank advocating for more-respectful software design - likens Harris to a tech-focused Ralph Nader.

Other people, including Adam Alter, a marketing professor at NYU, have championed theses similar to Harris’s; but according to Josh Elman, a Silicon Valley veteran with the venture-capital firm Greylock Partners, Harris is “the first putting it together in this way” - articulating the problem, its societal cost, and ideas for tackling it.

Elman compares the tech industry to Big Tobacco before the link between cigarettes and cancer was established:

Keen to give customers more of what they want, yet simultaneously inflicting collateral damage on their lives.



Harris, Elman says, is offering Silicon Valley a chance to reevaluate before more-immersive technology, like virtual reality, pushes us beyond a point of no return.

All this talk of hacking human psychology could sound paranoid, if Harris had not witnessed the manipulation firsthand. Raised in the Bay Area by a single mother employed as an advocate for injured workers, Harris spent his childhood creating simple software for Macintosh computers and writing fan mail to Steve Wozniak, a co-founder of Apple.

He studied computer science at Stanford while interning at Apple, then embarked on a master’s degree at Stanford, where he joined the Persuasive Technology Lab.

Run by the experimental psychologist B. J. Fogg, the lab has earned a cultlike following among entrepreneurs hoping to master Fogg’s principles of “behavior design” - a euphemism for what sometimes amounts to building software that nudges us toward the habits a company seeks to instill. (One of Instagram’s co-founders is an alumnus.)

In Fogg’s course, Harris studied the psychology of behavior change, such as how clicker training for dogs, among other methods of conditioning, can inspire products for people.

For example, rewarding someone with an instantaneous “like” after they post a photo can reinforce the action, and potentially shift it from an occasional to a daily activity.



Harris learned that the most-successful sites and apps hook us by tapping into deep-seated human needs. When LinkedIn launched, for instance, it created a hub-and-spoke icon to visually represent the size of each user’s network.

That triggered people’s innate craving for social approval and, in turn, got them scrambling to connect.

“Even though at the time there was nothing useful you could do with LinkedIn, that simple icon had a powerful effect in tapping into people’s desire not to look like losers,” Fogg told me.

Harris began to see that technology is not, as so many engineers claim, a neutral tool; rather, it’s capable of coaxing us to act in certain ways. And he was troubled that out of 10 sessions in Fogg’s course, only one addressed the ethics of these persuasive tactics. (Fogg says that topic is “woven throughout” the curriculum.)

Harris dropped out of the master’s program to launch a start-up that installed explanatory pop-ups across thousands of sites, including The New York Times’.

It was his first direct exposure to the war being waged for our time, and Harris felt torn between his company’s social mission, which was to spark curiosity by making facts easily accessible, and pressure from publishers to corral users into spending more and more minutes on their sites.

Though Harris insists he steered clear of persuasive tactics, he grew more familiar with how they were applied.

He came to conceive of them as “hijacking techniques” - the digital version of pumping sugar, salt, and fat into junk food in order to induce bingeing.



McDonald’s hooks us by appealing to our bodies’ craving for certain flavors; Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter hook us by delivering what psychologists call “variable rewards.”

Messages, photos, and “likes” appear on no set schedule, so we check for them compulsively, never sure when we’ll receive that dopamine-activating prize. (Delivering rewards at random has been proved to quickly and strongly reinforce behavior.)

Checking that Facebook friend request will take only a few seconds, we reason, though research shows that when interrupted, people take an average of 25 minutes to return to their original task.

Sites foster a sort of distracted lingering partly by lumping multiple services together. To answer the friend request, we’ll pass by the News Feed, where pictures and auto-play videos seduce us into scrolling through an infinite stream of posts - what Harris calls a “bottomless bowl,” referring to a study that found people eat 73 percent more soup out of self-refilling bowls than out of regular ones, without realizing they’ve consumed extra.

The “friend request” tab will nudge us to add even more contacts by suggesting “people you may know,” and in a split second, our unconscious impulses cause the cycle to continue:

Once we send the friend request, an alert appears on the recipient’s phone in bright red - a “trigger” color, Harris says, more likely than some other hues to make people click - and because seeing our name taps into a hardwired sense of social obligation, she will drop everything to answer.

In the end, he says, companies “stand back watching as a billion people run around like chickens with their heads cut off, responding to each other and feeling indebted to each other.”

A Facebook spokesperson told me the social network focuses on maximizing the quality of the experience - not the time its users spend on the site - and surveys its users daily to gauge success.

In response to this feedback, Facebook recently tweaked its News Feed algorithm to punish clickbait - stories with sensationalist headlines designed to attract readers. (LinkedIn and Instagram declined requests for comment. Twitter did not reply to multiple queries.)

Even so, a niche group of consultants has emerged to teach companies how to make their services irresistible. One such guru is Nir Eyal, the author of Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products, who has lectured or consulted for firms such as LinkedIn and Instagram.



A blog post he wrote touting the value of variable rewards is titled “Want to Hook Your Users? Drive Them Crazy.”

While asserting that companies are morally obligated to help those genuinely addicted to their services, Eyal contends that social media merely satisfies our appetite for entertainment in the same way TV or novels do, and that the latest technology tends to get vilified simply because it’s new, but eventually people find balance.

“Saying ‘Don’t use these techniques’ is essentially saying ‘Don’t make your products fun to use.’ That’s silly,” Eyal told me. “With every new technology, the older generation says ‘Kids these days are using too much of this and too much of that and it’s melting their brains.’ And it turns out that what we’ve always done is to adapt.”

Google acquired Harris’s company in 2011, and he ended up working on Gmail’s Inbox app. (He’s quick to note that while he was there, it was never an explicit goal to increase time spent on Gmail.)

A year into his tenure, Harris grew concerned about the failure to consider how seemingly minor design choices, such as having phones buzz with each new email, would cascade into billions of interruptions. His team dedicated months to fine-tuning the aesthetics of the Gmail app with the aim of building a more “delightful” email experience.

But to him that missed the bigger picture: Instead of trying to improve email, why not ask how email could improve our lives - or, for that matter, whether each design decision was making our lives worse?

Harris gives off a preppy-hippie vibe that allows him to move comfortably between Palo Alto boardrooms and device-free retreats

Six months after attending Burning Man in the Nevada desert, a trip Harris says helped him with:

“Waking up and questioning my own beliefs,” he quietly released “A Call to Minimize Distraction & Respect Users’ Attention,” a 144-page Google Slides presentation. In it, he declared, “Never before in history have the decisions of a handful of designers (mostly men, white, living in SF, aged 25–35) working at 3 companies” - Google, Apple, and Facebook - “had so much impact on how millions of people around the world spend their attention … We should feel an enormous responsibility to get this right.”

Although Harris sent the presentation to just 10 of his closest colleagues, it quickly spread to more than 5,000 Google employees, including then-CEO Larry Page, who discussed it with Harris in a meeting a year later.

“It sparked something,” recalls Mamie Rheingold, a former Google staffer who organized an internal Q&A session with Harris at the company’s headquarters. “He did successfully create a dialogue and open conversation about this in the company.”

Harris parlayed his presentation into a position as product philosopher, which involved researching ways Google could adopt ethical design.

But he says he came up against “inertia.” Product road maps had to be followed, and fixing tools that were obviously broken took precedence over systematically rethinking services. Chris Messina, then a designer at Google, says little changed following the release of Harris’s slides:

“It was one of those things where there’s a lot of head nods, and then people go back to work.”

Harris told me some colleagues misinterpreted his message, thinking that he was proposing banning people from social media, or that the solution was simply sending fewer notifications. (Google declined to comment.)

Harris left the company last December to push for change more widely, buoyed by a growing network of supporters that includes the MIT professor Sherry Turkle; Meetup’s CEO, Scott Heiferman; and Justin Rosenstein, a co-inventor of the “like” button; along with fed-up users and concerned employees across the industry.

“Pretty much every big company that’s manipulating users has been very interested in our work,” says Joe Edelman, who has spent the past five years trading ideas and leading workshops with Harris.

Through Time Well Spent, his advocacy group, Harris hopes to mobilize support for what he likens to an organic-food movement, but for software: an alternative built around core values, chief of which is helping us spend our time well, instead of demanding more of it.

Thus far, Time Well Spent is more a label for his crusade - and a vision he hopes others will embrace - than a full-blown organization. (Harris, its sole employee, self-funds it.)

Yet he’s amassed a network of volunteers keen to get involved, thanks in part to his frequent cameos on the thought-leader speaker circuit, including talks at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society; the O’Reilly Design Conference; an internal meeting of Facebook designers; and a TEDx event, whose video has been viewed more than 1 million times online.

Tim O’Reilly, the founder of O’Reilly Media and an early web pioneer, told me Harris’s ideas are:

“Definitely something that people who are influential are listening to and thinking about.” Even Fogg, who stopped wearing his Apple Watch because its incessant notifications annoyed him, is a fan of Harris’s work: “It’s a brave thing to do and a hard thing to do.”

At Unplug SF, a burly man calling himself “Haus” enveloped Harris in a bear hug. “This is the antidote!,” Haus cheered. “This is the antivenom!” All evening, I watched people pull Harris aside to say hello, or ask to schedule a meeting. Someone cornered Harris to tell him about his internet “sabbatical,” but Harris cut him off. “For me this is w‑talk,” he protested.

Harris admits that researching the ways our time gets hijacked has made him slightly obsessive about evaluating what counts as “time well spent” in his own life.

The hypnosis class Harris went to before meeting me - because he suspects the passive state we enter while scrolling through feeds is similar to being hypnotized - was not time well spent.

The slow-moving course, he told me, was “low bit rate” - a technical term for data-transfer speeds.

Attending the digital detox? Time very well spent. He was delighted to get swept up in a mass game of rock-paper-scissors, where a series of one-on-one elimination contests culminated in an onstage showdown between “Joe” and “Moonlight.”



Harris has a tendency to immerse himself in a single activity at a time. In conversation, he rarely breaks eye contact and will occasionally rest a hand on his interlocutor’s arm, as if to keep both parties present in the moment.

He got so wrapped up in our chat one afternoon that he attempted to get into an idling Uber that was not an Uber at all, but a car that had paused at a stop sign.

An accordion player and tango dancer in his spare time who pairs plaid shirts with a bracelet that has presence stamped into a silver charm, Harris gives off a preppy-hippie vibe that allows him to move comfortably between Palo Alto boardrooms and device-free retreats.

In that sense, he had a great deal in common with the other Unplug SF attendees, many of whom belong to a new class of tech elites “waking up” to their industry’s unwelcome side effects.

For many entrepreneurs, this epiphany has come with age, children, and the peace of mind of having several million in the bank, says Soren Gordhamer, the creator of Wisdom 2.0, a conference series about maintaining “presence and purpose” in the digital age.

“They feel guilty,” Gordhamer says. “They are realizing they built this thing that’s so addictive.”

I asked Harris whether he felt guilty about having joined Google, which has inserted its technology into our pockets, glasses, watches, and cars.



He didn’t. He acknowledged that some divisions, such as YouTube, benefit from coaxing us to stare at our screens. But he justified his decision to work there with the logic that since Google controls three interfaces through which millions engage with technology - Gmail, Android, and Chrome - the company was the “first line of defense.”

Getting Google to rethink those products, as he’d attempted to do, had the potential to transform our online experience.

Snapchat’s tactics for hooking users may make Facebook’s look quaint.

At a restaurant around the corner from Unplug SF, Harris demonstrated an alternative way of interacting with WMDs, based on his own self-defense tactics.

Certain tips were intuitive: He’s “almost militaristic about turning off notifications” on his iPhone, and he set a custom vibration pattern for text messages, so he can feel the difference between an automated alert and a human’s words.

Other tips drew on Harris’s study of psychology. Since merely glimpsing an app’s icon will -

“Trigger this whole set of sensations and thoughts,” he pruned the first screen of his phone to include only apps, such as Uber and Google Maps, that perform a single function and thus run a low risk of “bottomless bowl–ing.”

He tried to make his phone look minimalist: Taking a cue from a Google experiment that cut employees’ M&M snacking by moving the candy from clear to opaque containers, he buried colorful icons - along with time-sucking apps like Gmail and WhatsApp - inside folders on the second page of his iPhone.



As a result, that screen was practically grayscale. Harris launches apps by using what he calls the phone’s “consciousness filter” - typing Instagram, say, into its search bar - which reduces impulsive tapping.

For similar reasons, Harris keeps a Post-it on his laptop with this instruction: “Do not open without intention.”

His approach seems to have worked. I’m usually quick to be annoyed by friends reaching for their phones, but next to Harris, I felt like an addict. Wary of being judged, I made a point not to check my iPhone unless he checked his first, but he went so long without peeking that I started getting antsy. Harris assured me that I was far from an exception.

Curious to hear more about Harris’s plan for tackling manipulative software, I tagged along one morning to his meeting with two entrepreneurs eager to incorporate Time Well Spent values into their start-up.

Harris, flushed from a yoga class, met me at a bakery not far from the “intentional community house” where he lives with a dozen or so housemates.



We were joined by Micha Mikailian and Johnny Chan, the co-founders of an ad blocker, Intently, that replaces advertising with “intentions” reminding people to “Follow Your Bliss” or “Be Present.” Previously, they’d run a marketing and advertising agency.

They were interested in learning what it would take to integrate ethical design. Coordinating loosely with Joe Edelman, Harris is developing a code of conduct - the Hippocratic oath for software designers - and a playbook of best practices that can guide start-ups and corporations toward products that “treat people with respect.”

Having companies rethink the metrics by which they measure success would be a start. “You have to imagine: What are the concrete benefits landed in space and in time in a person’s life?,” Harris said, coaching Mikailian and Chan.

Harris hopes that companies will offer a healthier alternative to the current diet of tech junk food - perhaps at a premium price.

At his speaking engagements, Harris has presented prototype products that embody other principles of ethical design. He argues that technology should help us set boundaries.

This could be achieved by, for example, an inbox that asks how much time we want to dedicate to email, then gently reminds us when we’ve exceeded our quota. Technology should give us the ability to see where our time goes, so we can make informed decisions - imagine your phone alerting you when you’ve unlocked it for the 14th time in an hour.



And technology should help us meet our goals, give us control over our relationships, and enable us to disengage without anxiety. Harris has demoed a hypothetical “focus mode” for Gmail that would pause incoming messages until someone has finished concentrating on a task, while allowing interruptions in case of an emergency. (Slack has implemented a similar feature.)

Harris hopes to create a Time Well Spent certification - akin to the leed seal or an organic label - that would designate software made with those values in mind.

He already has a shortlist of apps that he endorses as early exemplars of the ethos, such as Pocket, Calendly, and f.lux, which, respectively, saves articles for future reading, lets people book empty slots on an individual’s calendar to streamline the process of scheduling meetings, and aims to improve sleep quality by adding a pinkish cast to the circadian-rhythm-disrupting blue light of screens. Intently could potentially join this coalition, he volunteered.

As a first step toward identifying other services that could qualify, Harris has experimented with creating software that would capture how many hours someone devotes weekly to each app on her phone, then ask her which ones were worthwhile.

The data could be compiled to create a leaderboard that shames apps that addict but fail to satisfy. Edelman has released a related tool for websites, called Hindsight. “We have to change what it means to win,” Harris says.

The biggest obstacle to incorporating ethical design and “agency” is not technical complexity. According to Harris, it’s a “will thing.” And on that front, even his supporters worry that the culture of Silicon Valley may be inherently at odds with anything that undermines engagement or growth.

“This is not the place where people tend to want to slow down and be deliberate about their actions and how their actions impact others,” says Jason Fried, who has spent the past 12 years running Basecamp, a project-management tool. “They want to make things more sugary and more tasty, and pull you in, and justify billions of dollars of valuation and hundreds of millions of dollars [in] VC funds.”

Rather than dismantling the entire attention economy, Harris hopes that companies will, at the very least, create a healthier alternative to the current diet of tech junk food.

He recognizes that this shift would require reevaluating entrenched business models so success no longer hinges on claiming attention and time.



As with organic vegetables, it’s possible that the first generation of Time Well Spent software might be available at a premium price, to make up for lost advertising dollars.

“Would you pay $7 a month for a version of Facebook that was built entirely to empower you to live your life?,” Harris says. “I think a lot of people would pay for that.”

Like splurging on grass-fed beef, paying for services that are available for free and disconnecting for days (even hours) at a time are luxuries that few but the reasonably well-off can afford.

I asked Harris whether this risked stratifying tech consumption, such that the privileged escape the mental hijacking and everyone else remains subjected to it. “It creates a new inequality. It does.”

Harris admitted. But he countered that if his movement gains steam, broader change could occur, much in the way Walmart now stocks organic produce.

Currently, though, the trend is toward deeper manipulation in ever more sophisticated forms. Harris fears that Snapchat’s tactics for hooking users make Facebook’s look quaint.

Facebook automatically tells a message’s sender when the recipient reads the note - a design choice that, per Fogg’s logic, activates our hardwired sense of social reciprocity and encourages the recipient to respond.



Related: Information And News Saturation: I Used to Be a Human Being

Snapchat ups the ante: Unless the default settings are changed, users are informed the instant a friend begins typing a message to them - which effectively makes it a faux pas not to finish a message you start.

Harris worries that the app’s Snapstreak feature, which displays how many days in a row two friends have snapped each other and rewards their loyalty with an emoji, seems to have been pulled straight from Fogg’s inventory of persuasive tactics.

Research shared with Harris by Emily Weinstein, a Harvard doctoral candidate, shows that Snapstreak is driving some teenagers nuts - to the point that before going on vacation, they give friends their log-in information and beg them to snap in their stead.

“To be honest, it made me sick to my stomach to hear these anecdotes,” Harris told me.

Harris thinks his best shot at improving the status quo is to get users riled up about the ways they’re being manipulated, then create a groundswell of support for technology that respects people’s agency - something akin to the privacy outcry that prodded companies to roll out personal-information protections.

While Harris’s experience at Google convinced him that users must demand change for it to happen, Edelman suggests that the incentive to adapt can originate within the industry, as engineers become reluctant to build products they view as unethical and companies face a brain drain.

The more people recognize the repercussions of tech firms’ persuasive tactics, the more working there “becomes uncool,” he says, a view I heard echoed by others in his field. “You can really burn through engineers hard.”

There is arguably an element of hypocrisy to the enlightened image that Silicon Valley projects, especially with its recent embrace of “mindfulness.”

Companies like Google and Facebook, which have offered mindfulness training and meditation spaces for their employees, position themselves as corporate leaders in this movement.



Yet this emphasis on mindfulness and consciousness, which has extended far beyond the tech world, puts the burden on users to train their focus, without acknowledging that the devices in their hands are engineered to chip away at their concentration.

It’s like telling people to get healthy by exercising more, then offering the choice between a Big Mac and a Quarter Pounder when they sit down for a meal.

And being aware of software’s seductive power does not mean being immune to its influence.

One evening, just as we were about to part ways for the night, Harris stood talking by his car when his phone flashed with a new text message. He glanced down at the screen and interrupted himself mid-sentence.

“Oh!” he announced, more to his phone than to me, and mumbled something about what a coincidence it was that the person texting him knew his friend. He looked back up sheepishly. “That’s a great example,” he said, waving his phone. “I had no control over the process.”

Who else but the despicable Western media justified the domestic police states that have been erected in the Western world in the name of the “war on terror”?

Along with the war criminals that comprised the Clinton, Bush, and Obama regimes, the Western media should be tried for their complicity in the massive crimes against humanity.

The Western media’s effort to sustain the high level of tension between the West and Russia is a danger to all mankind, a direct threat to life on earth. Gorbachev’s warnings are correct [Comment: No because he is a globalist tool - it will not happen].



Related: Mikhail Gorbachev: 'It All Looks as if the World Is Preparing for War'

Yet presstitutes declare that if Trump lifts the sanctions it proves that Trump is a Russian agent. It is paradoxical that the Democrats and the liberal-progressive-left are mobilizing the anti-war movement to oppose Trump’s anti-war policy!

By refusing to acknowledge and to apologize for its lies, euphemistically called “fake news,” the Western media has failed humanity in a number of other ways.

For example, by consciously telling lies, the media has legitimized the suborning of perjury and false testimony used to convict innocent defendants (such as Walter McMillian in Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy) in America’s “justice” system, which has about the same relation to justice as genocide has to mercy. If the media can lie about world events, police and prosecutors can lie about crimes.

By taking the role of the political opposition to Trump, the media has discredited itself as an honest critic on topics where Trump needs criticism, such as the environment and his tolerance of oppressive methods used by police.



Related: Trump War On Fake Media: The ‘Default’ Position Is ‘You Are Lying’

Trump needs to understand that “the Muslim threat” is a hoax created by the neoconservatives and the military/security complex with the complicity of the presstitutes to serve the hegemony agenda and the budget and power of the CIA, Pentagon, and military industries.

If the US stops bombing and slaughtering Muslims and training and equiping forces to overthrow non-compliant Muslim governments such as Syria, Iraq, and Libya, “the Muslim threat” will disappear.

Maybe Trump will add to his agenda breaking into hundreds of pieces the six mega-media companies that own 90% of the US media and selling the pieces to seperate independent owners who have no connection to the ruling elites.

Then America would again have a media that can constrain the government with truth rather than use lies to act for or against the government.




Watching Major Media Commit Suicide

Notes on the end of the news business as we know it: This article goes to many places. I think you’ll find a place that works for you.

I’ve been investigating and reporting on deep medical fraud for 29 years. I’ve been around the block a few hundred times. I’ve spoken with scientists who work for the government and universities, and the media operatives who support them. I know the game.

If Robert F Kennedy Jr is, indeed, given the green light by President Trump to investigate vaccine safety, he’s going to need a truck and a chain and DOJ threats of prosecution to drag key CDC scientists into the light and elicit specific statements from them.

Even then, the odds are these scientists will keep repeating the party line: vaccines are overwhelmingly safe; they have no connection to autism or other neurological damage; the science is settled.

Kennedy could run up against an organized wall of silence - scientists refusing to speak with him, on the basis that he isn’t qualified to make judgements in their “field.” In that case, he will need subpoena power, for starters.

Many years ago, I interviewed Jim Warner, a White House policy analyst in the Reagan administration. He had been trying to obtain medical-research information from the federal National Institutes of Health. He told me he was given the absolute cold shoulder: “If ever I’ve been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it’s their show. They just assume it.”

Arrogance par excellence. Scientists rebuff the White House with a yawn.

Fortunately, Kennedy is a relentless investigator. He understands how science is corrupted and paid for. And the ace in the deck is this: there is already enough evidence in the open record to refute the CDC’s claim of vaccine safety.

Trump has blazed a trail of rejecting major media. As a result of his merciless attacks, press outlets are going mad pushing numerous outlandish fake stories. They’re ripe for further incursions on their territory.

In the past, this was the pattern: an outsider enters the scene and accuses the government of vast fraud; media operators assemble their usual cast of sordid characters, who dismiss the charges; everybody goes home and the story dies.

But that’s not working anymore. Media pomposity is exposed as fakery. Millions of people see through the ruse.

The media emperor is naked. He can prance around and around, but his fundamental nakedness keeps compounding the joke.



Related: Fake News Media Protesting the Mass Removal of US State Dep’t Diplomats & Senior Staff

Truth be told, as their financial positions sink into dire red ink, press operations are trapped. Why? Because they are partners with the high-level criminals whose activities are the very stories the public wants to know about.

Reporting on these crimes in great depth, day after day, would resuscitate the newspapers and broadcast networks. But that will never happen.

For example, these crimes:

The Federal Reserve/a clandestine private corporation.

Medically caused death.

Toxic vaccines.

Trillions of dollars of missing US government money.

The power of the Trilateral Commission over US government policy.

The covert implementation of the UN agenda of destruction in US communities.

And a hundred more issues.

Expose these down to the core, and people would buy newspapers off the rack like they buy coffee and beer and video games and cell phones and gasoline and underwear and toilet paper and lipstick and fast food. The Times would have to schedule extra press runs just to keep up with the demand. Its financial bottom line would soon look like Christmas.

You could talk to the publisher of the New York Times and present him with an ironclad plan for pulling his paper out of its deep financial hole, based on covering true stories like those above, and you would find no joy, because he would rather go down with the ship than go up against The Matrix.

The Times and other hoary media outlets live by the rule of limited hangout. In intelligence parlance, that means admitting a small piece of the truth in order to hide the rest.

“We’ll show you a tree in the forest, but not the forest.”

I know how it works, because as a reporter I’ve been there. I’ve approached editors of various media outlets with stories that crack the trance, and I’ve had those stories tossed back at me.

“We’re just not interested,” they say. “This isn’t our kind of piece.” Or: “Well, we already covered that.” But they didn’t cover it. They did a limited hangout on it. They ran a story that exposed one tiny corner of a whole bloody mess.

I say this - as simple fact - if any intelligent, aggressive, truly independent investigator were the managing editor of the New York Times, and if he were given free rein, he would have that paper back in the black in a year.

He would have it roaring on all cylinders. He would have people fighting each other in the streets to grab the last copy off the newsstand. Journalism schools all over the country would close down in shame.

Because he would be running stories that would crack the whole rotting edifice of cartel-control along many fronts, and he would be filling up a planned vacuum of truth with fire.

A decade ago, here is what a working reporter for a major paper told me:

“We know what stories we can’t cover. Nobody needs to prep us. Our editors know, too. Otherwise, they’d never get to be editors.”

A player in a non-profit group once told me I could have a job with a paper on the east coast. In a roundabout way, he hinted at what they were looking for. In five minutes, I saw the handwriting on the wall. Essentially, the editor was searching for a reporter who would cover politics in Central America.

The stories would have to favor the repressive governments in power. The basic cover was: these leaders were fighting the good fight against Communism. The death squads they were sending out, in cooperation with the CIA, were freedom fighters. And of course, any mention of cocaine trafficking as a means for obtaining weapons was off-limits.

None of this was spelled out. But the message was clear. They wanted a propaganda specialist. If I, as an up and coming reporter, decided to play ball, I could advance up the ladder.

Apparently, some travel was necessary. But I knew I could turn out reams of copy without ever leaving my apartment, because I grasped the fundamental angle I was supposed to pursue. Needless to say, I turned down the offer.

It was the first time I fully realized how easy the job of reporting could be. Assemble a list of reliable sources (who would support the mandatory point of view), walk right into a prepared group of corporate and think-tank allies, pull down copy from wire services, and re-write stories in a way that bolstered the idea that American Empire was really “spreading democracy” to the less fortunate. A walk in the park.

Twenty years later, I saw the same overall pattern in hundreds of major-media stories - but the point of view and the mandate had changed.

Now it was all about Globalism. The covert op was the takedown of America, in order to squash the last vestige of political freedom and integrate the nation in “a new economic order.”

However, over the mountains, a new dawn was rising: the Internet. Independent media outlets. The resistance.

It was immediately obvious that, unless someone could shut this new creature down, major media would have no way to challenge the invasion. Independent news sources would gradually wreck MSM financial bottom lines.

Fronting for Globalist princes, Big News would see their bias exposed time and time again. The blowback on them would be enormous. Trapped and corned like rats, they would attack, but their efforts would only compound their problem.

Then a populist named Donald Trump strolled on to the scene. He knew major media were suffering great losses. He knew online media were in the ascendance. He had people like Steve Bannon (Breitbart) who were bringing him up to speed. He saw how Matt Drudge was obliterating traditional news sources, even while (selectively) linking to them.

A revolution was in progress.

Trump had the right stuff for this situation, because he didn’t care about offending people. He was mercurial, reckless; an opportunist. He could fly by the seat of his pants. He realized where and how, in America, the Globalists were causing great damage.

Trump accelerated the fall of major media from their thrones.

People around the world, untold millions, thought to themselves, “Trump is finally giving major media what they deserve.”

Giving the major media what they deserve is a force to be reckoned with, because there is no effective response to it. Nothing works. Who can lead the fight to preserve mainstream news? Answer: mainstream news.

That isn’t going to go anywhere, because more and more people are rejecting the mainstream wholesale.

Think of major media as a ship. In full view of the passengers, the captain has just steered it into a shore of high rocks. The craft is beginning to tilt, and it’s taking on water. As the passengers scramble to safety on the beach, the captain is yelling;

“Don’t leave, come back, everything is all right, I didn’t do anything wrong, it’s your fault, you’re too stupid to understand the correct principles of navigation!” Translation: “I’m committing suicide. Go down with me.”

As a reporter starting out in the 1980s, one of my first glimpses of trouble involved a few of the papers I was writing for: they were definitely on the political Left, but at the same time they were businesses.

You only had to look at the ads choking the pages to see that. They were capitalist enterprises. But they would never fully admit that. They were operating under a self-induced, self-serving delusion about fundamental economics.

Eventually, larger publishers bought them out, and a few of the old guard made significant dollars on the deals. It was an old story about socialists getting rich.

This contradiction plagues every major media outlet today. They claim to serve the public interest, but they want to be rich. Their reporters want very nice salaries.

And this is all in the service of Globalism, which aims to bankrupt economies and drive populations into the arms of technocrat planners of societies. It doesn’t add up. It doesn’t work.



Related: Wave Of State Department Personnel Resign, Are Fired As Tillerson Takes Control

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be rich and working hard to achieve it. But claiming, at the same time, that you want the government to run the economy is a sick joke.

A transparently sick joke, on the order of wealthy celebrities stumping for socialism, while they hire more armed security and dig bunkers on their walled properties.

Suppose you could approach a well-known and well-paid reporter for the New York Times. And suppose you said this:

“For years, you’ve been writing about the less fortunate and giving back and more government support for the downtrodden and humanitarianism and so on - so I want to know, would you be willing to donate two-thirds of your salary, for the sake of equality, to those who need the money? Would you be willing to sell your co-op and give the money to the poor and move into a small apartment?”

The duplicitous and slimy major media are obviously engaged in a long con. They want their cake, they want to eat it, and they also want to appear as architects of “a more humane planet.”

They care about a more humane order in the same way an ant cares about space travel.

They care about serving their bosses, and those bosses have other bosses who are engineering a future of poverty for all, as a mechanism of control. That’s who’s paying reporters their salaries.

Do you know what a tired rich media liberal (fake socialist) looks like? Of course you do. You can see one every night anchoring the national news. Over the years, I’ve spoken with a few of these types. In every case, I’ve gotten the impression they’re sitting on a keg of dynamite.

They know how precarious their position is. They’re surprised they’ve lasted as long as they have. Their spouting of liberal homilies is transparent. Where did they go wrong? Answer: the first day they accepted their first job as a reporter.

That’s when they sold out. They knew it then, and under cheesy layers of vast pretensions, they still know it now. But they can’t turn around. They’ve made a commitment.

They tell themselves: “It’s business. It’s not personal. This is the business I’m in.”

But of course, it is personal. Everything is personal. We’re talking about lives and minds and souls.

That’s what these reporters traded, in the perverse corner of the marketplace. They chose the rackets, the information mafia, the law of omerta, the dishonorable underground that lives in the highest penthouses.

Whatever gloss they lay on, the trap they’re in stays in place. And now, they’re sinking and sinking. I could try to work up pity for them, buy why bother? Damage is damage, and they’ve done a great deal of it. A full confession would make a start, but that’s not going to happen.

They’re in a race with themselves. How long can they keep erecting delusions about their work, vs. their growing realization about those delusions? It’s inescapably personal. It always was.

The night is falling on them, and the rain is coming down, too. Their mandate is to be on the Inside, but they’re on the Outside now. They’re the walking dead. They’ll keep walking, but things will never be the same.

As a long addendum, here is a backgrounder, an article I wrote headlined, “Howard Beale, the last sane man on television”:

The best film ever made about television’s war on the population is Paddy Chayefsky’s scorching masterpiece, Network (1976). Yet it stages only a few minutes of on-air television.

The rest of the film is dialogue and monologue about television. Thus you could say that, in this case, word defeats image.

Even when showing what happens on the TV screen, Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:

“So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television’s a god-damned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business… We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here. You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion.”

Beale, coming apart at the seams, is a mad prophet. And because he shines with brilliance and poetry, he can affect minds. Therefore, the television network can make use of him. It can turn him into a cartoon for the masses.

It is Beale’s language and the passion with which he delivers it that constitutes his dangerous weapon. Therefore, the Network transforms him into a cheap religious figure, whose audience slathers him with absurd adoration.

Television’s enemy is the word. Its currency is image. Beale breaks through the image and defiles it. He cracks the egg. He stops the picture-flow. He brings back the sound and rhythm of spoken poetry. That is his true transgression against the medium that employs him.

The modern matrix has everything to do with how knowledge is acquired. Television, in the main, does not attempt to impart knowledge. It strives to give the viewer the impression that he knows something. There is a difference.

Knowledge, once established, is external to, and independent of, the viewer. Whereas the impression of knowing is a feeling, a conviction, a belief the viewer holds, after he has watched moving images on a screen.

Images… plus, of course, in the case of the news, the narrative voice. A basic premise of New Age thinking is: “everything is (connected to) everything.” This fits quite well with the experience of watching film or video flow.

Example: we see angry crowds on the street of a foreign city. Then young people on their cell phones sitting in an outdoor café. Then the marble lobby of a government building where men in suits are walking, standing in groups talking to each other.

Then at night, rockets exploding in the sky. Then armored vehicles moving through a gate into the city. Then clouds of smoke on another street and people running, chased by police.



A flow of consecutive images. The sequence, obviously, has been assembled by a news editor, but most of the viewing audience isn’t aware of that. They’re watching the “interconnected” images and listening to a news anchor tell a story that colors (infects) every image.

Viewers thus believe they know something. Television has imparted that sensation to them. That’s what news is all about: delivering a sensation of knowing to the audience.

There is no convenient place where the ordinary viewing audience can stop the flow of images or the story being told. They are inside it. They don’t have the leverage of a crystalized idea or the power of reasoning to get out.

They are inside the story. Knowledge thus becomes story. The viewer is transfixed by the sensation that he is “inside” watching/experiencing story.

This fixation produces a short circuit in his reasoning mind (if he has one). No time to stop, no time to think; just watch the flow.

When you take this pattern out to a whole society, you are talking about a dominant method through which “knowledge” is gained.

“Did you see that fantastic video about the Iraq War? It showed that Saddam actually had bioweapons.” “Really? How did they show that?” “Well, I don’t exactly remember. But watch it. You’ll see.”

And that’s another feature of the modern acquisition of knowledge: amnesia about details.

The viewer can’t recall key features of what he saw. Or if he can, he can’t describe them, because he was in the flow. He was inside, busy building up his impression of knowing something.

Narrative-visual-television story strips out and discards conceptual references. And lines of reasoning? To the extent they exist, they’re wrapped around and inside the image-flow and the narration.

Ideas aren’t as interesting as images. That’s the premise.

To grasp the diminishment of language, consider the current use of the word “text.” Suddenly it’s become a verb; it means a process of sending words. It also refers to paragraphs or pages of writing, as opposed to pictures.



Related: Not Just Surveillance: 3 Current Phenomena Exposing 1984 As An Instruction Manual For The State

“Text” makes “writing” seem like nothing more than one functional (and machine-like) method of delivering information.

And since bone-dry information (e.g., “genetic sequences”) these days is practically considered a synonym for life, when a writer infuses his words with passion, they automatically become a “rant.” “Rant” was formerly applied to describe what a person did when he was totally unhinged to the point of making no coherent sense.

Image, not the word, is the now preferred means of acquiring what passes for knowledge.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), once told me in an interview:

“If you wanted to try a real revolution, you would produce thousands of videos consisting of written words on screens, with someone speaking those words. You would try to reinstate language as a medium. Poetry, formal arguments and debates, great speeches, dramatic readings. You would go up against image and try to relegate it to its proper place…”

In the American colonies of the 18th century, several hundred thousand copies of Tom Paine’s pamphlet, Common Sense, were distributed among a total population of only 2.5 million people, and the earth shook.

When a technology (television) turns into a method of perception, reality is turned inside out. People watch TV through TV eyes.

Mind control is no longer something merely imposed from the outside. It is a matrix of a self-feeding, self-demanding loop. Willing devotees of the image want images, food stamps of the programmed society.

But now, something is happening. Something different.

It is to be fervently wished that the revolution against major media will also result in a revolution against knowledge as nothing more than image.


Reporters Tell Me the Truth Off the Record: The Fake News Business

During my 34 years of working as a reporter, I’ve had many informal conversations with mainstream journalists. They were illuminating.

Here, from my notes (1982-2011), taken after the conversations, are what these guardians on the watchtower revealed:

ONE: “Investigative reporting has been dying. There’s no money for it. If I work on a piece for three months, while my paper is paying me, suppose at the end I come up dry? It happens. I can’t make my case. I’ve got nothing to show for it, and my paper is out whatever they’ve been paying me.

They don’t like that. The other thing is, investigative work makes my bosses nervous. They don’t know where it’ll lead. Worst case, I might come up with something that’ll put the paper in a bad light. It’s like an intelligence agent in the field who wanders off the reservation.



He’s got an assignment, but he sees something better, more important, and that’s where he goes. He ends up finding out something about his own agency. Something bad. I’ve seen that happen. A reporter finds out his own paper has been covering up a heavy scandal.

It’s an intrinsic part of the story. What’s he going to do now? Go to his editor and tell him what’s going on? Chances are, his editor already knows. Now the reporter’s jammed up. He’s in a bad spot. A guy I know came to me with that exact problem. You know what I told him? Burn your notes. That’s what I said.”

TWO: “Most reporters who cover major issues are de facto intelligence assets. Some know it, most don’t. They’re all taking their information from controlled sources. It’s like somebody giving you talking points as if they’re the honest truth. In these talking points, you’re told who the players are in a story and what they’re doing.

But they aren’t the important players, and what they’re doing is just a cover for what’s really going on. It’s all about misdirection. I’ve managed to get a few stories published about illusion vs. reality. But the thing is, no one follows up on that. It’s in print, and then it dies.



One night, I had a little heart to heart with my editor. I told him it would be a lot easier if I just had a desk at the CIA in Langley. He agreed. He said we could move the whole paper there. But then the spooks would realize they didn’t need us at all. They could put out the paper themselves.”

THREE: “We’re in a business. We’re selling a product. That’s our role. If our bosses don’t like what we’re submitting to them, they let us know we’re giving them the wrong product. Our company makes product A and we’re giving them product B.

Most reporters wouldn’t even understand what I’m saying, because they’re mentally in the camp of product A. That’s where they live. So as far as they’re concerned, they have lots of leeway. I don’t like talking to those guys. They’re dumb.”

FOUR: “I can write an article that’s critical of what a drug company is specifically doing, but I can’t criticize the company. If I did, my editor would read me the riot act. He knows if he published that article, his boss would get a visit from the company. They would threaten to pull their advertising.



Everybody would be in serious trouble. There is a fine line. Sometimes, the evidence against a drug company is huge, and we can get away with a critical article. But most of the time, it’s a no-go area. I could lose my job. If I did, I would have a hell of a time trying to find another position on the same level. I might be subject to an industry-wide demotion.”

FIVE: “I thought I could quit working for my paper and get hired by somebody else, who would give me more freedom to write the stories I wanted to. I made a few quiet inquiries.

Turned out I was wrong. They’re all pretty much the same. I could get hired by some small paper and write whatever I wanted to, but I would make very little money. I’d be screwed. They don’t cover this in journalism school.”

SIX: “Sometimes an order comes down. By the time I get it, it isn’t sounding exactly like an order. It’s more like ‘this is what we’re doing’. We need to go after a politician and bury him. That kind of thing. Nobody is complicit. You can’t find somebody and blame him for issuing the order. It’s vague enough that everyone escapes blame.



And you don’t want to talk to your colleagues too much about it. You don’t want to be seen as making waves. It’s sort of like a game plan in football. You’re going to execute the plan. You’re not going to start talking about what a lousy plan it is.”

SEVEN: “I’m a guy who’s expected to put out baloney for our audience. I can slice it a few different ways, but it’s the same basic thing. After a few years, I can do it in my sleep. I know the routine.”

EIGHT: “You talk about who’s really running things behind the scene. I know something about that. But I can’t write it in a story. That would be called original research. I’m not allowed to do that. I can only quote authorities on two sides of an issue.



And the guy I quote first - he carries the point of view of the story. The other guy is the doubter. I place him in the weaker position. I get to choose, but I already know what’s needed and required.”

NINE: “Reporters in my business have two choices. They can lower their IQs and become cynics, or they can maintain their intelligence and get booted out. That’s what it comes down to. Anybody with an IQ over 90 can see we have agendas. The whole business is agenda-driven.

The main job of a reporter who wants to keep working is developing a cover - pretending he’s speaking the truth. This is a cover for his real identity. A guy who pleases his bosses. Several of us had the whole Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky story before it was published. We wanted to go with it, but we were told to sit on it.



So it was our job to agree with that assessment. We had to pretend we didn’t have enough proof yet. We had the proof, but we had to make it seem like we were responsible journalists and needed more. That was a bunch of crap. The agenda was to protect ourselves from the wrath of the White House.

That’s what the editors and the publishers were talking about among themselves. Sure - protect the president. But the real thing was the fear that he and his people would strike back at us and do us damage.”

TEN: “My decision to get out of the news business was pretty easy. I wanted to write a story about the influence of the Council on Foreign Relations on government policy, since World War Two. The way I was told to forget about it was like a cop talking to a drug dealer. All of a sudden, I was the bad guy. I really got into it with my editor. I saw what a phony he was.



The thing is, I knew he had a cozy thing going with the CIA. Several people knew it. In my years in the business, I got a first-hand education in what selling out means. I came pretty close to the edge. There’s a weird adrenaline kick to it. You see your whole future laid out in front of you. It’s very rewarding, in terms of money and status. If you just play ball, it’ll be a smooth ride.”

ELEVEN: “What the teachers told me in journalism school was a load. All I needed was one honest talk with a professor, and I never would have bothered with the whole thing. I was naïve. During my career, there were days I thought we were really on the right track. Somebody wrote a great piece, and it was published. But then we fell back. We put out provable lies.



And they were big ones. It was like being psychologically whipsawed. A few great days, and a lot of bad ones. The worst thing for me was government sources. I was like a horse with a feed bag on, and they were filling it up with rotten food. They knew it, I knew it, and we just kept doing it.”

TWELVE: “I saw what I called ‘the inch-below’ thing. An inch below what we were reporting was the real story. It was about power players and what they were doing to make profit for major corporations. It kept coming up. Crimes. People should have been arrested. I could have written great stories. But nobody wanted them. I would have proved intent. I’m talking about wars.

Not little stuff. Whole wars, and the money. The profits. In court, a lawyer could have taken what I had and made a great circumstantial case. The jury would have been convinced. When you can’t publish these stories, you sink into boredom after a while. Tremendous boredom. That’s why some reporters become drunks.”

In 2013, Paris was sent to a “treatment center” following her suicide attempt where she reportedly “cut her wrists with a kitchen knife and took as many as 20 ibuprofen tablets.” In my article about this story, I shared some of Paris’ social media posts where she alluded to occult rituals and secret societies.



One of Paris’ tweets about secret societies.



One of the several drawings posted by the then 15 year old Paris. A hexagram with all-seeing eyes and a bloody knife. 666 in the pool of blood

The conclusion of that article was:

"Paris appears to be a bright young girl who is quite aware for her age. She however appears to be “tainted” and manipulated by the same dark forces that killed her father. Let’s hope things get better for her."

Fast-forward to today, things apparently got better for her, but the “dark forces” of the industry are still within arm’s reach. Paris’ feature in Rolling Stone included pictures by one of the elite’s favorite photographer: David LaChapelle. As expected, the pictures are charged with symbolism.

The magazine cover features Paris with a halo behind her head, a lightning bolt pendant, a choker and the “hand of benediction”

The picture is reminiscent of Christian iconography.



A depiction of Christ featuring a halo and the hand of benediction

The symbol of the lightning bolt is esoterically associated with Lucifer due to the fact that he’s described as a “fallen angel” who descended from the heavens to earth … like a lightning bolt.

Therefore, the combination of Christian iconography with the bolt results in a typical study in duality. Typical David LaChapelle imagery.




In another symbolic picture, Paris stands rather stiffly as a halo floats over her head. For some reason, a brick wall hides a popular depiction of her father



This image of Michael Jackson is hidden by a brick wall with Paris standing in front of it. Why though?

From Paris’ answers in the interview we understand a few things: She’s a product of the industry, she has been traumatized by it and she apparently holds some insider information.

At the beginning of the article we learn about Paris’ fascination with the morbid and celebrity deaths.

" Paris-Michael Katherine Jackson is staring at a famous corpse. “That’s Marilyn Monroe,” she whispers, facing a wall covered with gruesome autopsy photos. “And that’s JFK. You can’t even find these online.” On a Thursday afternoon in late November, Paris is making her way through the Museum of Death, a cramped maze of formaldehyde-scented horrors on Hollywood Boulevard. It’s not uncommon for visitors, confronted with decapitation photos, snuff films and serial-killer memorabilia, to faint, vomit or both. But Paris, not far removed from the emo and goth phases of her earlier teens, seems to find it all somehow soothing. This is her ninth visit. “It’s awesome,” she had said on the way over. “They have a real electric chair and a real head!”

Paris then reveals that she has attempted suicide several times.

" Paris describes herself as “desensitized” to even the most graphic reminders of human mortality. In June 2013, drowning in depression and a drug addiction, she tried to kill herself at age 15, slashing her wrist and downing 20 Motrin pills. “It was just self-hatred,” she says, “low self-esteem, thinking that I couldn’t do anything right, not thinking I was worthy of living anymore.” She had been self-harming, cutting herself, managing to conceal it from her family. Some of her tattoos now cover the scars, as well as what she says are track marks from drug use. Before that, she had already attempted suicide “multiple times,” she says, with an incongruous laugh. “It was just once that it became public.” The hospital had a “three-strike rule,” she recalls, and, after that last attempt, insisted she attend a residential therapy program."

Without going into details, she divulges that she was abused by a complete stranger who was much older.

"There was another trauma that she’s never mentioned in public. When she was 14, a much older “complete stranger” sexually assaulted her, she says. “I don’t wanna give too many details. But it was not a good experience at all, and it was really hard for me, and, at the time, I didn’t tell anybody.”

Was she in contact with powerful Hollywood child abusers? Is this why she “didn’t tell anybody”?

Paris also said that she was convinced that her father Michael was killed.

"Paris blames Dr. Conrad Murray – who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in her father’s death – for the dependency on the anesthetic drug propofol that led to it. She calls him “the ‘doctor,'” with satirical air quotes. But she has darker suspicions about her father’s death. “He would drop hints about people being out to get him,” she says. “And at some point he was like, ‘They’re gonna kill me one day.'” (Lisa Marie Presley told Oprah Winfrey of a similar conversation with Michael, who expressed fears that unnamed parties were targeting him to get at his half of the Sony/ATV music-publishing catalog, worth hundreds of millions.) Paris is convinced that her dad was, somehow, murdered. “Absolutely,” she says. “Because it’s obvious. All arrows point to that. It sounds like a total conspiracy theory and it sounds like bullshit, but all real fans and everybody in the family knows it. It was a setup. It was bullshit.” But who would have wanted Michael Jackson dead? Paris pauses for several seconds, maybe considering a specific answer, but just says, “A lot of people.” Paris wants revenge, or at least justice. “Of course,” she says, eyes glowing. “I definitely do, but it’s a chess game. And I am trying to play the chess game the right way. And that’s all I can say about that right now.”

Strange fact: After learning about Paris’ 2013 suicide attempt, Conrad Murray, who is serving a four year prison sentence, sent Paris a creepy “support” message stating:

“I love you as a precious father loves his own child and I always will.”

These words are coming from the guy WHO IS IN PRISON FOR KILLING HER FATHER.

Paris also added that she was scared for Justin Bieber who works with the same promoters as Michael Jackson at the time of his death.

“They drain them dry and work them to death.” (A rep for AEG declined comment.) She describes seeing Justin Bieber on a recent tour and being “scared” for him. “He was tired, going through the motions. I looked at my ticket, saw AEG Live, and I thought back to how my dad was exhausted all the time but couldn’t sleep.”

Less than 24 hours after the release of this interview, Paris was swarmed by paparazzi at LAX which caused her to break down and run away.

She then posted on Twitter that she wants to be left alone.



Let’s hope she stays away from the vultures of the entertainment industry.

As president, Trump’s position appears to be consistent with his skepticism.

During the Obama administration, the official White House site carried an information piece titled, “A Historic Commitment to Protecting the Environment and Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change,” which explained the former president’s commitment to policies that were ostensibly designed to reverse human impact on the climate through industrialization and modernization.

Obama, like all climate change hoaxers, claimed that it was the ‘biggest threat to our children’ than nuclear war or terrorism, and he regularly trotted out “data” that his federal bureaucracy claimed was “proof” that a) the Earth’s climate is “changing” and b) it’s because too many cows fart and too many Americans drive SUVs.

But Trump - and a host of genuinely independent scientists and climatologists interested in real data - has never bought into the hype.



Related: Climate Change: The Government’s Best Revenue Stream Since War and Taxes

What’s more, he and millions of Americans watched as Obama’s business and economic policies destroyed jobs and opportunity because they were based on something more akin to a religion. (RELATED: How are ‘they’ fooling us today? Find out at Hoax.news)

"Climate skeptics are thrilled that one of the very first visible changes of the transition of power between President Obama and President Trump is the booting of ‘climate change’ from the White House website,” said a statement from Climate Depot, a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, or CFACT, which documents climate change hoaxes and phony data. “Trump is truly going to make science great again and reject the notion that humans are the control knob of the climate and UN treaties and EPA regulations can somehow regulate temperature and storminess. Welcome to the era of sound science!”

While the Obama-era climate change page has been taken down, the Trump administration has uploaded the president’s “America First Energy Plan” to the Whitehouse.gov site in its place.

"Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil,” the plan says. “For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.”

The plan also notes that “sound” energy policy must begin with the acknowledgement that the United States has vast, untapped energy reserves that have been placed under federal ‘protection’ for decades by previous administrations.

The administration says it is committed to unlocking those reserves and embracing the shale oil and gas “revolution” that will bring good-paying jobs to millions of Americans. (RELATED: What’s going on with American energy? Find out at Power.news)

That kind of a policy plays right into the hands of the angry Left, which has claimed for months that Trump would destroy the environment by making our air and water dirtier. But such ridiculous claims are based on the irrational premise that our new president wants us to have dirty air and water - which is something he, too, would suffer.



Related: Trump To Release Secret DARPA Technology To The World

The web site says there is an estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale in the U.S., along with oil, and natural gas, “especially those on federal lands that the American people own.”

The administration would use the revenues from energy production to “rebuild our roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure,” which Trump frequently brought up on the campaign trail. By tapping into U.S. reserves, energy prices will come down for all Americans, and “will be a big boost to American agriculture as well.”

The Trump administration also said it will be committed to clean coal technology, as well as reviving the coal industry so ravaged under the Obama regime.

Related: Light Pillars, a Million-Mirror Optical Illusion on Winter Nights

The New York Times, the “paper of record,” published a very interesting piece on January 26, 1989. The headline read: “US Data since 1895 Fail to Show Warming Trend.”



Related: GWPF Newsletter: Trump Meets With Princeton Physicist Who Says CO2 Is Good For Us

Here are a few key paragraphs:

“After examining climate data extending back nearly 100 years, a team of Government scientists has concluded that there has been no significant change in average temperatures or rainfall in the United States over that entire period.” “While the nation’s weather in individual years or even for periods of years has been hotter or cooler and drier or wetter than in other periods, the new study shows that over the last century there has been no trend in one direction or another.” “The study, made by scientists for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was published in the current issue of Geophysical Research Letters. It is based on temperature and precipitation readings taken at weather stations around the country from 1895 to 1987.”

Then comes the revisionist stepping-back from the explosive finding:

“Dr. Kirby Hanson, the meteorologist who led the study, said in a telephone interview that the findings concerning the United States do not necessarily ‘cast doubt’ on previous findings of a worldwide trend toward warmer temperatures… He said that the United States occupies only a small percentage of Earth’s surface and that the new findings may be the result of regional variations.”

That’s a beauty, isn’t it? The US, with its massive spewing industrial/automotive output of CO2 is—owing to a mysterious force - not warming. It’s angels, of course. Angels scrubbing the sky.



Related: Freak snowfall brings winter to summer in southern alpine areas

Actually, later in the Times article;

"Dr. James E. Hansen, director of National Aeronautic and Space Administration’s Institute for Space Studies in Manhattan” offers this gem: “Another possibility, he [Hansen] said, was that there were special conditions in the United States that would tend to offset a warming trend. For example, industrial activity produces dust and other solid particles that help form liquid droplets in the atmosphere. These droplets reflect radiation away from Earth and thus have a cooling influence.”

But I suppose, through a REVERSE miracle, the droplets do allow heat generated at ground level to escape upward. If the droplets did trap heat at ground level, temperatures would rise - and the study showed that wasn’t occurring. More angels. The magic droplets deflect heat coming down, but not going up.

The Times had no follow-up questions.


Hot Air





But don’t worry, be happy. It’s all good. Yes, the warming hypothesis leads to carbon taxes, lowering energy output in order to keep us all from frying, and the consequent decimation of the economy - but look, people make mistakes. And those mistakes generate unpleasant results. However, they mean well. They really do.

They’re not using a bogus warming hypothesis to torpedo america and the rest of the world, as part of a globalist machination of control. they don’t want to decimate the economy and reduce us to a helpless state of poverty.

They would never do that.

After a parade of false flag shootings enhanced with completely faked (staged) elements - such as professional actors playing the roles of grieving parents - most of the informed people in the world now know that everything is faked in the mainstream media.

Search GoodGopher.com for the term “crisis actors” by clicking here. You’ll be astonished at what you learn.

Case in point: The “sloppy sniper” from the Sandy Hook event. This “sniper” was actually a professional actor named David Wheeler. He also played the role of a grieving parent for CNN’s camera.

Hilariously, he carried around a sniper rifle by clutching the magazine… something no real sniper would ever do (but few people who aren’t familiar with sniper rifles would ever notice). It’s all so hilarious: Even the AR-15 on his chest is flipped around backwards, for a leftie.

Anyone familiar with actual firearms can look at this guy and know he has no clue how to handle firearms.

Sandy Hook 'Dad' Caught Playing Two Roles: Crisis Actor Parent and Swat Team Member

This entire topic of fake news, staged events and false flag shootings was considered “loony conspiracy theory” just two years ago. But now, after watching the depths of fakery, false news and total fabrication of events being pulled off by the Washington Post, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, etc., everybody is waking up to the realization that the “news” is just another name for the wool that’s being pulled over our eyes to blind us from the truth.

The truly loony conspiracies are being pushed by the Washington Post, which knowingly fabricates false news and then gets repeatedly caught doing so. In just the past few weeks, the Washington Post has completely fabricated a loony conspiracy theory about the Russians “hacking” the U.S. election as well as a totally made-up story about Russian hackers “penetrating” the U.S. power grid in Vermont.

In both cases - and many more - the WashPost literally just “made s##t up” and printed it as fact.

When it comes to gun control or domestic terrorism, there’s nothing the corporate controlled media won’t fake, stage, distort or fabricate to push their agenda of disarming the citizens (an obvious prelude to totalitarian government control of the citizenry). To provide the narratives to the media, the deep state runs gun control false flag operations to give the faked media something to “whip up” as a form of journo-terrorism (to terrorize the American people).

So how do they pull off gun control false flag operations? First, they have to train people to carry out the shootings. And that’s where our Ft. Lauderdale shooter, Esteban Santiago, enters the picture.


US Intelligence Forced Him to Watch ISIS Propaganda Videos, Says Santiago in His Own Words

“Estaban Santiago, the 26-year-old airline passenger accused of shooting up a baggage claim area at the Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood airport Friday, leaving five dead and eight injured, visited the FBI Anchorage field office and told officers he was being forced to watch ISIS videos,” reports Fox News:

Santiago told agents that US intelligence had infiltrated his mind and were forcing him to watch ISIS propaganda videos.

"In November 2016, Esteban Santiago walked into the Anchorage FBI Field Office to report that his mind was being controlled by a U.S. intelligence agency,” a senior federal law enforcement official said.

It’s no coincidence that this is one of the first phases of creating a “Manchurian Candidate” type of human pawn… a “Jason Bourne” mind control subject who can be used by the deep state as a weapon to carry out executions, mass shootings, suicide bombings or other forms of mayhem that achieve a political or social purpose.

It is very common, by the way, for intelligence mind control operatives to choose U.S. military veterans as their subjects. That way, if anything goes wrong, they can blame it on PTSD or various “veteran afflictions.”

As Fox News reports:

"Santiago was born in New Jersey and his family was originally from Puerto Rico–where he served in the Puerto Rico National Guard. He was in the Army Reserves prior to serving in the Alaska Army National Guard. According to reports, he was honorably discharged four months ago from his last post at Fort Greely, Alaska, and his military rank at that time was E3 (Private First Class)."

Heavily Wosed With Psychiatric Drugs to Eliminate Distinction Between Reality vs. Hallucination

Typically, “Jason Bourne” candidates are heavily drugged with psychiatric drugs in order to blur the lines between fiction and reality. Often, the drugging begins with selected soldier candidates even before they are discharged from the military. This is done for all the obvious reasons:

The psychiatric drugging takes place offshore, out of the domain of U.S. medical ethics oversight, and the military has no requirement to heed such boundaries in the first place.



Related: Airport shooter said he was "mind controlled" by U.S. Intelligence Agency

“His maternal aunt, Maria Ruiz, who lives in Union City, told reporters in New Jersey that he wasn’t the same when he came back from Iraq,” reports ABC News channel 10:

""He lost his mind,” Ruiz said in Spanish, as she referred to a psychiatric hospitalization that occurred after he allegedly suffered from hallucinations. After Santiago’s military service in Puerto Rico and Alaska from Dec. 14, 2007 to August 2016, the former Army private first class was still undergoing psychological treatment, according to relatives."

How to Build a Jason Bourne Mind Controlled Puppet to Carry Out Executions, Suicide Bombings or Mass Shootings

This is exactly how the deep state builds a Jason Bourne: They pick an obedient soldier, drug him into oblivion, force him to watch ISIS propaganda videos, indoctrinate him with images and directives to carry out mass killings, and then keep him drugged with ongoing “psychological treatment” until he’s needed for a desired mission.

Once the mission is approved, the mind controlled puppet is unleashed onto the public to commit the mass murder, then is immediately arrested or executed to make sure the narrative is controlled and concluded.

If taken alive, he is then heavily drugged into a state of insanity, making sure he can never utter a coherent thought again. Or, if he is somehow allowed to talk to reporters or appear on camera, he will appear completely insane due to the relentless drugging. All court proceedings are handled in a secretive manner to make sure no real investigations can take place.

This is precisely what happened to the “Batman theater shooter” James Holmes, who reportedly carried out a mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, at the height of the Obama regime’s gun control hysteria.

Notably, James Holmes was heavily medicated before the attack with antidepressants and hypnosis drugs.

As I wrote in 2012:

"These two drugs produce devastating, dangerous side effects. For example, clonazepam causes increased violent behavior in individuals with schizophrenia. That’s the conclusion of a 1982 study entitled “Clonazepam treatment of chronic schizophrenia: negative results in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.”

In addition, he was also under the psychiatric “care” of the United States Air Force, which kept him drugged.

As always happens, a judge quickly slapped a gag order on the Holmes legal case, preventing anyone from discovering details about how Holmes was handed a scripted blueprint of the attack while being drugged into obedient compliance.

As Jon Rappoport writes, the Aurora shooting was almost certainly a planned “covert op” using a Manchurian candidate / Jason Bourne mind control approach.

Furthermore, James Holmes’ apartment was staged with the most elaborate systems of tripwires, booby traps and sabotage bombs that law enforcement in the area had ever witnessed. James Holmes, an academic researcher, had no knowledge or skills to construct such bombs. It was obviously done for him.

Also from Jon Rappoport:

"Holmes has little or no experience with guns. He knows nothing about explosives. He isn’t a professional in any sense of the word. He has never committed a crime before. If he has any qualification for the heinous operation, it is his vulnerability. He is adrift in his life. Never as brilliant a student as others thought him to be, he is failing in graduate school. He has no job and no prospects. What began as a potential career has dissolved. His interest in arcane aspects of neuroscience (temporal delusion – the possibility of changing the past), once a fascinating field of inquiry for him, now only contributes to his increasingly shaky grip on reality. The planning is rather simple and direct. The actual killer(s) will enter the theater, while Holmes, who is drugged into a stupor and is sitting in his car, waits in the parking lot of the theater, among weapons and other gear that matches the killers’. Once the killers leave the theater, they’ll deposit their guns with him, as he lies in a semi-conscious blurred state. They’ll deposit gun residue on his body. When the police find Holmes in his car (not at the the theater exit or outside the car), he will surrender. Perhaps, under prior hypnosis, he was instructed to say his apartment is wired with explosives. Of course, the hired professionals did that intricate construction. And perhaps Holmes never tells the police about his apartment and explosives, and this information has really come from a tip."

Eyewitness Reports of Multiple Shooters Now Being Eliminated From the Official Media Narrative

Although this isn’t being widely reported, the Ft. Lauderdale shooting featured eyewitness reports of multiple shooters, too. As Fox News reports:

"In the ensuing panic, the TSA received two separate, unconfirmed reports of a separate active shooter, a law enforcement official close to the investigation told Fox News. However, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said Friday afternoon there was no indication any additional shots were fired."

Related: Airport shooter blamed CIA, 'jihadi chat rooms'

Fox News also reports that law enforcement claimed the shooter was on a Canadian Air flight:

"Broward County Commissioner Chip La Marca posted on Facebook that Santiago was a “passenger on a Canadian flight with a checked gun. He claimed his bag and took the gun from baggage and went into the bathroom to load it. Came out shooting people in baggage claim. There were 13 total shot, 5 dead, 8 transported to hospital.”

But Santiago didn’t fly Canadian Air. He flew on Delta Air Lines. Via ABC News:

"On Friday, Santiago checked a bag with a firearm before boarding a Delta Air Lines flight from Alaska to Minneapolis. His final destination was Fort Lauderdale."

Don’t Believe the Official Narrative… It’s Always Part of the Cover Story

If you continue to follow this story, you’ll easily spot all sorts of contradictions, false narratives and faked news coverage from the “fakestream media.” The correct interpretation of all this to reject everything the mainstream media tells you by default. They are known, deliberate liars.

Only the independent media is trying to tell the truth in analyzing these events.

Although we can’t yet prove it, the far more likely explanation of what happened is as follows:

Santiago was a “Jason Bourne” mind control subject of the deep state. Recruited from the military, he was subjected to intense psychiatric drugging combined with intense mental programming by deep state operatives to transform him into a human weapon who could be obediently controlled.

Once he deplaned at Ft. Lauderdale and pick up his checked bags, another person walked up to him and uttered an “activation” phrase into his ear. (It’s not science fiction. This is exactly how hypnosis can really work with enough programming reinforcement in an individual’s mind.) He then walks into the bathroom, loads his firearm and proceeds to carry out his mission by shooting people.

Once his firearm is empty, he spreads eagle on the floor, having completed his mission. This is exactly what he did, and it’s how law enforcement found him.

It really is as simple as that.

Yes, certain people can be incredibly easily mind controlled into carrying out almost any act. Just look at the recent Facebook live kidnapping, torture and scalping of an innocent white teen.

The four thugs who carried out that heinous act were obviously mentally influenced by the mainstream media as part of the journo-terrorism campaign being waged against the American people.


The Sandy Hook Actors, "Do You Want Me To Read The Card?"

As you may know, this explosive story came out in November and was followed by an intense mass media campaign to discredit it.

"And there’s even more in this gem of video slime, including references to Dennis Hastert and certain photographs, though we won’t dive into those details here.” – Washington Post, CBS affiliate’s ‘big question’: Why no law enforcement investigation of ‘Pizzagate’ allegations?

The video has been removed from the CBS 46 website but can still be viewed on Ben Swann’s YouTube channel.


Related Articles:

Why Were These Two Finnish Journalists and an Elected Government Official Assassinated?

150 Terabytes! Norway Busts Largest Dark Web, Child Porn Networks In History - US, UK Media Ignore Story

New Zealand’s ‘Elite’ Child Abuse Rings Exposed




My Name Is Anneke Lucas And I Was A Sex Slave To Europe's Elite At Age 6

This story is the second in a series called "Real Women, Real Stories," a social project designed to promote awareness of the often unseen hardships women face in different professions and places around the world. Read the first story in the series here.

When I was a little girl in my native Belgium, I was put to work as a sex slave.

My mother sold me, and drove me wherever, whenever she got the call. The boss of this pedophile network was a Belgian cabinet minister.

The clients were members of the elite. I recognized people from television. Their faces were familiar to the masses, while I was confronted with the dark side of their power addiction - the side no one would believe existed. I came across VIP's, European heads of state, and even a member of a royal family.

Around my sixth birthday, in 1969, I was taken to an orgy for the first time, in a castle. I was used for an S&M show, on a low stage, chained up with an iron dog collar, and made to eat human feces.

Afterwards, left lying there like a broken object, I felt so humiliated, I had to do something to save my soul, or else - and this I knew for certain - I would have withered and died.


I Was a Sex Slave to Europe's Elite at Age 6

Related: My Name Is Brooke Axtell and I Was Sex Trafficked at Age 7 in the US

I raised myself up, and stood looking at the bizarre crowd of aristocrats dressed up as hippies, swaying to the music in various levels of sexual interaction, busily availing themselves of little pills and pre-rolled joints passed around on silver trays by sober waiters.

I trembled in fear, but my body straightened and stilled itself like a bow in suspense before the shot, and I heard my voice as though it were not my own, chiding the adults, telling them that this was wrong – that I was going to tell on them, and that they would all go to jail.

Trippy, spacey music was oozing through the atmosphere and most people were too high to notice me. One man, wearing a business suit, caught my eye. He looked scared, but he held my gaze for a brief moment, and seemed to feel for me. Then he was gone. I never saw him again in the network, but years later I did spot him on TV. He became a prominent Belgian politician. 

I was quietly led away and taken to a cellar. I was certain that I was going to be killed, but instead I was shown the fresh body of a young murder victim. I was to remain silent.

Related: 'I Remember the Smells, the Sights, and the Taste of Slavery': Jessa Dillow Crisp Shares Her Story

During the week, I went to school. I was a shy girl, with few friends. I remember, once, in the second grade, becoming aware of an energetic shift in the room, to realize all eyes were on me. The teacher had been calling on me, and I had been too spaced out to hear. She wondered out loud if I knew the answer to the question she had asked, and I sat in embarrassing silence while the class laughed.

I was a nonentity at school, and at home no one cared for me. I received more attention in the network. It felt good to be viewed as the most perfectly beautiful, sensual object by powerful men with high standards in taste. This was the only positive in my life, and I clung to it as my only raft to keep from drowning in a sea of shame and self-loathing.

After four years of surviving the network, when I was 10, a new guest brought along his 20-year-old son: tall, dashing, blond, and blue-eyed. He boldly advanced toward me. I smiled, and he called me a little whore. Not since the first time I had been brought to an orgy, four years earlier, had I expressed my true feelings. I was furious.

Related: I Was Raped by a Fellow Freshman & My College Found Him Innocent: Aspen Mattis Shares Her Story

"You think I like it here?" I sneered.

This interaction started the most intense year of my life, in which I would feel more than ever loved, seen, and understood, and would be more than ever abused, all by that same young man.

A year later, when he was through with me, I was of no use to the network anymore, and was to be killed. When my torture began, he stood watching, laughing.

This was the third time that my entire being became filled with an otherworldly force. Fierce pride straightened my body. A burning cigarette was put out on my forearm. My energetic body latched onto his in pure defiance. The thought "I don't need you!" had become me, and all I saw was the energy behind the troubled ocean of blue in his eyes, and the love in spite of all the pain he had passed on to me.

I was led away to a small room, and strapped onto a butcher's block. The man who tortured me was one of the defendants in the notorious Dutroux case, which, when it broke the news in 1996, was believed it would blow up the Belgian pedophile network.



But instead, eight years later, only Marc Dutroux received a life sentence. I should have died that night in 1974 on that butcher's block, but my life was saved at the last minute.

While I had been tortured, the young man had been negotiating with the politician in charge of the network. They made a deal: he would work for the politician, extend his shady services in exchange for my life. This one good deed eventually cost him his own life. In this milieu, any shred of humanity is a deadly weakness.

Related: Pakistani Mother Sentenced to Death for Burning Daughter Alive in 'Honor Killing'

My life was spared, and I was told to remain silent forever. It took me 40 years before I could speak up.

In 1988, when I was 25 years old, I was walking downtown Los Angeles, near Skid Row, and got a faint, specific whiff of human feces, and was assaulted with the memory of the extreme humiliation I had suffered as a child. My instant thought was: "If this is true, I'm going to kill myself."

I was too identified with the experience, and the shame was too great. I wasn't ready, and pushed the memory back into the subconscious. It would take several more years, many more hours of therapy, to finally share this memory with one safe person.

I share this experience publicly here for the first time, having finally reached a place in my healing where I have access once again to the strength that came through me in those moments of clarity in the network. I also believe that the world is more than ever ready to confront its darkness. We have to, if we are to survive as a species.

All survivors of incest, sexual abuse, and sex trafficking have my strength. Though I suffer from PTSD, and, for example, I still become nauseous whenever I hear a certain kind of airy, trippy music, I've become so mindful of triggers that they don't control my everyday existence. It takes so much energy to survive not only the physical violence, but to endure the psychic drain of abuse - to carry the shame.

Just surviving daily life while trying to heal from child sexual abuse requires a thousand times the strength it would require for someone without awareness to pursue a successful career. And society still values the career person over the survivor.

Power addicts, world leaders, and corrupt politicians who abuse children are themselves like children who never grew up, driven to power to avoid ever feeling the humiliation of child abuse again, unconsciously seeking revenge from a place of hurt by recycling the abuse. They lack the courage to heal. 

Those of us who have suffered sexual abuse, incest or sex trafficking need to learn to harness our survival strength on our own behalf, so we can heal our damaged ego, and channel that strength to lead the way towards a future in which former victims conquer by love, understanding and compassion for all.

1. Manning Clemency

Under intense public pressure in the last few weeks, the Obama government surprise Donald Trump and the rest of the Republicans with a commutation of Chelsea Manning’s prison sentence. Manning will be released on May 17 instead of 2045, and without the quid pro quo from Wikileaks editor Julian Assange.

The 2008 Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the commutation was “a grave mistake that will encourage further acts of espionage.”



… Former New York Times columnist and current Fox News contributor Judith Miller was blasted on social media after kicking off the “How many people have died” chorus as a result of Manning’s leaks following Tuesday’s announcement. But she wasn’t the only media personality to excoriate Manning.

Related: ‘A slap in the face’: US elites slam Manning’s ‘outrageous’ impending release

Obama justified his action during his last press conference…

"It has been my view that given she went to trial, that due process was carried out, that she took responsibility for her crime, that the sentence she received was very disproportionate relative to what other leakers have received, and that she had served a significant amount of time, it made sense to commute – not pardon – part of her sentence,” he said. Commutation sent a message that whistleblowers “need to work through established channels,” he added. - US is ‘strongest country… we’re going to be OK’: Obama's last White House news conference

Working through “established channels,” Mr. Obama, is not whistleblowing, but asking for promotion.

Nevertheless, Obama just admitted the truth about their use of fake intelligence…

Another unexpected event is the recent online disclosure of the Central Intelligence Agency regarding its “full history.”.


2. CIA CREST Searchable Database

CIA Releases 13 trillion pages of declassified files online instead of just limiting its access to four terminals at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland.


The online releases include files about:

MK-ULTRA mind control program,

UFO sightings

Project Stargate regarding human telepathy

Nazi war crimes

Cuban Missile Crisis

“CIA isn’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts,” said Michael Best, who went to the four terminals and started scanning the files which are “technically publicly available” through the CREST database in Maryland. A bit less than a year ago, I embarked on a quest to get a copy of the millions of pages of CIA documents stored on CREST, the CIA Records Search Tool. The CREST database was technically publicly available, in the sense that anyone could theoretically use the four computers located in the back of a library that (for budgetary reasons) lacks a librarian for half of the day. These four computers are currently the only ones that can access the CREST database, and they’re only accessible Monday through Friday from 9 Am to 4:30 PM. In other words, most people who aren’t full time researchers can’t use the database even if they’re within driving distance. By printing out and scanning the documents at CIA expense, I was able to begin making them freely available to the public and to give the Agency a financial incentive to simply put the database online. I’m pleased to say that these efforts have been a success, and the Agency is putting the database online. CIA isn’t doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. Several FOIA requests have been filed for the database, including by the National Security Archive and MuckRock. MuckRock actually sued the Agency with the help of Kel McClanahan of National Security Counselors. The Agency said it would take 28 years to process the files. After some more legal pressure from Mr. McClanahan, the Agency reduced their estimate to six years. This was still too long, and so I began my effort. The hope was that the financial pressure, the negative press and making it not only a legal but a practical inevitability that these files would be put online would force the Agency to speed up their timetable. Thanks to the combined (but uncoordinated) efforts of myself and MuckRock, these files will soon be available." - 775,000 CIA Papers From CREST

According Michael Best, “There are a little over 775,000 files that make up over 13,000,000 pages that have been declassified as part of the 25-year automatic declassification review period. Before the most recent update of files at the beginning of the year, the database was estimated to be about 840 gigabytes.


Breaking these files down into categories, we get:

Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s papers: 40,000 pages of newly declassified documents. The papers did not originate with CIA, but “contain many CIA equities.”

Directorate of Science and Technology R&D: 20,000 pages

Analytic intelligence publication files: Over 100,000 pages.

News archives: The Agency collected a lot of news stories about themselves and the subjects they were interested in. Their news archive, much of which is included in CREST, contains many

Office of the DCI Collection (ODCI): 28,550 documents/ 129,000 pages from the records of the first five Directors of Central Intelligence: Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, General Walter “Bedell” Smith, Allen Dulles, John McCone, and Richard Helms. These records run from the beginning of CIA in 1947 through the late 1960s and include a wide variety of memos, letters, minutes of meetings, chronologies and related files from the Office of the DCI (ODCI) that document the high level workings of the CIA during its early years.

Directorate of Intelligence (DI) Central Intelligence Bulletins: 8,800 documents/ 123,000 pages from a collection of daily Central Intelligence Bulletins (CIB), National Intelligence Bulletins (NIB) and National Intelligence Dailies (NID) running from 1951 through 1979. The CIBs/NIBs were published six days a week (Monday through Saturday) and were all source compilations of articles and consisting initially of short Daily Briefs and longer Significant Intelligence Reports and Estimates on key events and tops of the day. The CIBs/ NIBs were circulated to high level policy-makers in the US Government.

General CIA Records: Records from the CIA’s archives that are 25 years old or older, including a wide variety of finished intelligence reports, field information reports, high-level Agency policy papers and memoranda, and other documents produced by the CIA.

STAR GATE: A 25-year Intelligence Community effort that used remote viewers who claimed to use clairvoyance, precognition, or telepathy to acquire and describe information about targets that were blocked from ordinary perception. The records include documentation of remote viewing sessions, training, internal memoranda, foreign assessments, and program reviews.

Consolidated Translations: Translated reports of foreign-language technical articles of intelligence interest, organized by author and each document covers a single subject.

Scientific Abstracts: Abstracts of foreign scientific and technical journal articles from around the world.

Ground Photo Caption Cards: Used to identify photographs in the NlMA ground photograph collection. Each caption card contains a serial number that corresponds to the identical serial number on a ground photograph. The master negatives of the ground photography collection have been accessioned separately to NARA. The caption cards provide descriptive information to help identify which master negatives researchers may wish to request.

National Intelligence Survey: National Intelligence Survey gazetteers.

NGA: Records from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, primarily photographic intelligence reports.

Joint Publication Research Service: Provided translations of regional and topical issues in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Office of Strategic Services files: Documents from the OSS, CIA’s World War II predecessor.

While these documents are older, they aren’t irrelevant. One of the CREST documents provided the smoking gun for my
expose on an NSA Director sabotaging the NSA.

Now, the CIA has decided to put the files online for the world to peruse in their own time. Go there.

The CIA has advertised this online release as its “full history” but we disagree, of course.

In all, more than 12 million documents are accessible, covering the history of the CIA from its creation in the 1940s up to the 1990s – with intelligence officials giving assurances that the half-century of data is in its entirety, with nothing removed.

"None of this is cherry-picked,” CIA spokesperson Heather Fritz Horniak told CNN. “It’s the full history. It’s good and bads.” - 'Full history': Secret CIA documents now available online

But they’re not ready yet to disclose who George Bush, Sr. really is.

"According to Otto Skorzeny, pictured is the Scherff family and a few friends (circa 1938). Holding “Mother” Scherff’s hand at left is Martin Bormann. In front is Reinhardt Gehlen. In back is Joseph Mengele and to his right is Skorzeny as a young man. At center right (in the German navy uniform) is George H. Scherff, Jr. and his father George H. Scherff, Sr. Bormann became Hitler’s second in command. Reinhardt Gehlen was a chief SS officer and assassin who was smuggled out of Germany under Operation Paperclip. Skorzeny was Hitler’s bodyguard and SS spy/assassin who came to the U.S. after the war under Project Paperclip. Skorzeny and GHW Bush were instrumental in merging Nazi (SS) intelligence with the OSI to form the CIA with “Wild Bill” Donovan and Allen Dulles. These guys were also part of CIA mind control experiments such as MK-ULTRA. SS officer and physician Joseph Mengele, the notoriously sadistic “Angel of Death” of Auschwitz, escaped Germany to South America after the war. George H. Scherff, Jr., became the 41st President of the United States as GHW Bush and George H. Scherff, Sr., was Nicola Tesla’s “trusted assistant.” - George Scherff Jr. 6th Day in Houston Methodist Hospital

The censorship continues with Facebook banning Russia Today from posting in its platform until after Trump’s inauguration day…

In contrast to Obama’s non-event last press conference from the comfort of the White House press room, VP Joe Biden took a wrong turn in Davos, he later found out.


3. Exit stage left: Lights go out on Biden as he talks of US ‘leadership’ in Davos speech

It may have just been coincidence, or perhaps something more symbolic, but whatever it was, Joe Biden saw the lights go out on him as he mentioned US “leadership” during his last major speech as vice president, in Davos, Switzerland.

“We are going to retain our position of leadership,” Biden was telling the audience at the World Economic Forum in Davos, when the lights on stage began to dim.


Lights go out on Biden as he talks of US ‘leadership’ in Davos speech

Related: Exit stage left: Lights go out on Biden as he talks of US ‘leadership’ in Davos speech

Rendered a dark silhouette, and seemingly unimpressed, the outgoing vice president carried on talking about the West’s ideas and visions of the world. “If we don’t fight for our values, no one else will,” he said from the darkness.

Moments later the lights came back on, allowing Biden to proceed with his rather dark warnings to the world.

Biden used his final major speech while in office to accuse Russia and President Vladimir Putin of “purposefully” aiming to “collapse the liberal international order.”

He meant his team’s collapsing world order, in favor of a new one…

"An agreement ceremony is being held at the United Nations headquarters in New York City as RT starts broadcasting within the UN HQ internal information network. RT Director General Aleksey Nikolov and UN Under-Secretary-General Cristina Gallach are delivering speeches at the ceremony."

4. Agreement Ceremony as RT Starts Broadcasting on UN HQ Network

5.The Clinton Foundation is Shutting Down The Clinton Global Initiative

Anyway, the most welcome development of all is probably the underreported shutdown of the now irrelevant Clinton Global Initiative.

In a “mass layoff” event reported late last week by the Department of Labor, the Clinton Foundation announced it would lay off some 22 employees at the Clinton Global Initiative, which attained notoriety during the John Podesta leaks, when the various details of the fallout between between CGI head Doug Band and Chelsea Clinton were revealed; it also emerged that long-time Bill Clinton friend Band was soliciting donations for Clinton through his PR firm, Teneo in an sordid example of “pay for play” which most of the mainstream media refused to cover, especially after Band emailed Podesta “If this story gets out, we are screwed.” Filed as mandated by the Department of Labor’s Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification, or WARN notice, on January 12, the Clinton Foundation’s Veronika Shiroka advised the DOL that as part of a “Plant Layoff” it would layoff 22 workers on April 15, with reason for the dislocation stated as “Discontinuation of the Clinton Global Initiative.” The layoffs are part of the Clinton plan put in motion ahead of the presidential election, to offset a storm of criticism regarding pay-to-play allegations during Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. - The Clinton Foundation Is Shutting Down The Clinton Global Initiative

Conclusions

Most of the Davos Conference attendees this year are more optimistic with the presence of Xi Jinping, and the election of Donald Trump, while pessimistic with a renewal of Nazionist Merkel’s term of office, and another provocative, massive NATO deployment of troops and materiel along the Russian border.

Make no mistake, there’s still a war going on in the Middle East particularly in Syria, and the ongoing genocide in Yemen.

Both Russia and Turkey are now working together to finish off the job against Daesh terrorists who continue to pester around the eastern parts of Syria.

"On Wednesday, the Russian military confirmed that Russian and Turkish combat aircraft had carried out their first joint aerial operation against targets in Syria… Turkish defense analyst Koray Gurbuz said that the joint operation has effectively forced the US-led anti-Daesh coalition to remember that there’s a war on." - Russian-Turkish Joint Strikes on Daesh Remind US-Led Coalition There's a War On

All of this trouble is, of course, courtesy of the outgoing Obama administration.

Both China and Iran have pledged to support the post-war reconstruction of Syria. Trump is also invited to the peace talks in Astana this year.

Eventually, both Xi and Trump will compete as to who will control the global economy, free of global wars and regional conflicts, from hereon.

We are now entering a transitory phase to a multipolar world, and since we haven’t been here before, we can expect a few bumps here and there.

All we need to do now is prevent the new leaderships from having the urge of turning people into virtual machines that they can switch on and off, as they want. We must tread carefully upon a well-coordinated move to abolish cash in favor of its digital counterpart that is still within the Rothschild’s central banks’ control.

Refuse the looming Technocratic Dictatorship!

The Central Intelligence Agency published more than 12 million declassified documents online Tuesday after years of restricting access.

The documents, dated from the 1940s to 1990s, surround everything from the overthrow of foreign governments to the CIA’s mind-control efforts.

Originally declassified by former President Bill Clinton in 1995, the documents were only available after the year 2000 on computers hosted at the National Archives in Washington D.C.

Joseph Lambert, the CIA’s director of information management, told Buzzfeed’s Jason Leopold publication ensures the massive cache can be accessed by anyone “from the comfort of your own home.”

"We’ve been working on this for a very long time and this is one of the things I wanted to make sure got done before I left,” Lambert added.

In 2014 the CIA had originally told media outlet MuckRock, who filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in order to obtain access to the archive, that at least 6 years would be needed to release the entire database.





In a court filing last November the CIA informed MuckRock it instead anticipated that only a year would be needed before the “database will be publicly available online.”

Some of the more eyebrow-raising documents, as noted by Leopold, include files on media outlets and the CIA’s “Star Gate” program.

"There are also secret documents about a telepathy and precognition program known as Star Gate, files the CIA kept on certain media publications, such as Mother Jones, photographs, more than 100,000 pages of internal intelligence bulletins, policy papers, and memos written by former CIA directors.”

Those interested can search the entire database at the CIA Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Electronic Reading Room.

So of course they support gun control, oppose the death penalty and the Pentagon budget, and pride themselves on voting for pro-“peace” candidates.  And yet when it comes right down to it, in their own line of work, they are plenty militant, even warlike.  And that goes double if the target is Donald Trump.

We might pause to note that the piece was written by the Times’ media columnist, Jim Rutenberg, who, from his lofty journalistic perch, has emerged as the dean of anti-Trump press-punditry. Back in August, Rutenberg wrote that it was time for journalists to junk the idea of being unbiased about Trump and instead move “closer to being oppositional.” 

Translated, reporters should now feel liberated to call Trump any name they can think of, including liar - and the MSM has done just that, of course, with gusto.  

More recently, in that January 13 column, Rutenberg warned his readers that Trump, “a master media manipulator,” was winning the battle against the press. That is, the President-elect had been using his power to “expertly delegitimize the news media,” thus changing the subject from his own record to the media’s record.  Seeing a serious problem as a result, Rutenberg added:

“The news media remains an unwitting accomplice in its own diminishment as it fails to get a handle on how to cover this new and wholly unprecedented president.”

Could Trump really be doing all that?  It sure looks that way. After all, if the MSM is waging war on Trump, Trump is also waging war on the MSM.  Indeed, we might add, Trump is doing a better job - he’s winning. 

And why is he winning? Because he’s smarter and tougher. 

Most obviously, there’s Trump’s Twitter feed, which now numbers 20 million followers. As he has said, possessing an audience that big is like owning The New York Times, only without the financial losses. Moreover, including all forms of social media, his audience totals some 50 million. 



Related: Veteran Intel Pros Demand for Russian ‘Hacking’ Proof from Obama

And yet even that big number understates his impact, because his messages always echo in the news. It’s fair to say that even before Trump is inaugurated as president, he has proven that when he wants to get a point across, everyone in the country gets it.   

So here we might be tempted to interpolate the wisdom of the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, who declared;

“He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.”

And Trump has been prepared.  

And yes, sheer gumption matters, too. It was Trump the man who stared down Megyn Kelly, the Pope, all his Republican rivals, and Hillary Clinton. And most recently, Trump won the confrontation over the “dirty dossier,” the passel of allegations leaked by the “Intelligence Community” last week and published, in all its inglorious non-detail detail, by BuzzFeed.  



Related: Intelligence insiders call Russian dossier ‘complete fraud’ – Trump

In his January 11 press conference, held in the middle of the resulting media firestorm, Trump showed no fear as he took on virtually the entire press corps. 

He denied all the allegations, adding that reporters should be ashamed of themselves for even thinking of bringing up such an unverified opposition-research dump. He refused to take a question from CNN’s Jim Acosta, labeling the entire network as “fake news,” and he lambasted BuzzFeed as a “failing pile of garbage.”  

And in fact, soon the MSM was scampering away from the dossier; investigative-reporting legend Bob Woodward agreed with Trump, calling it a “garbage document.”  And then, on Twitter, Trump hit back even harder, comparing the attack on him to some sort of atrocity out of Nazi Germany.




The Real Purpose of Intel Report on Russian Hacking With Abby Martin & Ben Norton

On this episode of On Contact, Chris Hedges is joined by journalists Abby Martin and Ben Norton to discuss the declassified U.S. intelligence report on Russia’s alleged “influence campaign” on the U.S. presidential election.

They explore the allegations and why a large portion of the report is dedicated to RT America’s programming. RT correspondent Anya Parampil details the charges made in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence report.

Needless to say, this turn of events has been disturbing to diehard Trump haters such as Rutenberg. As he wrote to his brothers and sisters in the Fourth Estate, the next time they were going to do battle with Trump, they had to have a stronger plan. 

And speaking of the MSM as a whole, Rutenberg added;

“It better figure things out, fast, because it has found itself at the edge of the cliff.”

In the meantime, amidst the MSM disarray, Trump is still on the offensive. Here’s the headline from the January 15 New York Times: “Trump Team Considers Moving Press Corps, Alarming Reporters.” 



That is, the Trump communications shop is considering a plan to move the White House press corps from its current location in the West Wing to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. In the words of Sean Spicer, the incoming White House press secretary:

“While no decisions have been made, there is enormous interest in covering Donald Trump. The current briefing room only has 49 seats, so we have looked at rooms within the White House to conduct briefings that have additional capacity.”

Spicer makes a good point: In a country of 320 million people, plus the rest of the world, why should just 49 individuals get the privilege of sitting in on press briefings? 

Why not move to a location that would enable more reporters to participate? Isn’t that what freedom is all about? 

Needless to say, the White House Correspondents Association (WHCA) doesn’t agree. It’s an insider club; it doesn’t like the prospect of opening its doors to new competition, not one little bit. 



Related: Washington Post Grasps at Crazy Conspiracy Theory in Support of Hillary Clinton

And even though the possible new location in the EEOB is less than 100 feet away from the West Wing, it is, as far as the MSM is concerned, an exile to Siberia. (And never mind the fact that until the 1890s, reporters didn’t have regular access to the White House at all; back then, they had to stand around outside the building. And yet, somehow, the First Amendment survived.)

In the meantime, one could even say that the WHCA is “up in arms” over this possible relocation; attendance at its meetings has tripled, as reporters “march toward the sound of the guns.” 

In the meantime, as the Battle of the Briefing Room is being waged, the MSM has just scored a victory of its own. On Monday, Monica Crowley, slated to be the communications point-person for the National Security Council, announced that she would not, after all, be joining the Trump administration. Crowley had been barraged by revelations from CNN that seemed to indicate repeated incidents of plagiarism.

As The New Republic cheered, “This also creates a fresh incentive for both journalists and Congress to keep investigating Trump’s nominees.”

So yes, although the MSM has taken some hard punches of late, it still has the ability to punch back.  It’s a war, of attack and counter-attack. Or, as Virgil used to say in olden times, et ferrum iterum ferrum.

This struggle is likely to go on for as long as Trump is president, although Breitbart readers, of course, tutored in #WAR, know that the fight is never-ending. 



Related: Journo-terrorism: NYT calls for online trolls to sabotage Breitbart.com’s revenues

Yet at the moment, with the right resurgent and the left lurching, it’s the MSM, as Rutenberg suggests, that is most in need of self-examination - as a prelude, it can hope, to better strategizing in the future.

And so the MSM is doing just that, carrying on its informal planning sessions over casual coffee, through morning conference calls, via e-mail list-servs and message boards, in op-eds, and, of course, at myriad university - and foundation-funded seminars and conferences.  

Who knows if all this cogitation will produce a better strategy or not; all we know for sure is that the MSM is waging a robust debate with itself, trying hard to come up with better answers than it has had in the past. 

Oh, and one other thing we know for sure: The objective is, always, to destroy Donald Trump. 

Radical Left Group Plots Violence at Trump Inauguration: “Chemical Attack With Butyric Acid”

Part I: Undercover investigation exposes groups plotting criminal activity at Trump inauguration

Part II: NEW Investigation Uncovers Plot to Chain the Trains & Shut Down DC During Inauguration

Lavrov: US diplomats frequently took part in Russian opposition rallies

CIA Director John Brennan Is “Worst Than a Prostitute”

Trump Blasts Media’s Fake Polls: Same fake polls the media put out before the election now say Trump is unpopular

Who Is Paying Protesters To Disrupt Trump’s Inauguration?

The Purge: Inauguration Day – NWO Targets Stone: International elite going after Trump loyalists




Analyzing Mainstream News Anti-Logic

Thousands of articles have been written about the so-called Russian hack of the US election. The term “Russian hack” suggests the Russkies actually found a way to subvert the results of voting machines.

But of course, no convincing evidence has been presented to support such a charge. In fact, when you drill down a few inches below the surface, you find this charge instead: Russia hacked into email accounts and scooped up Hillary, DNC, and Podesta emails, and passed them to WikiLeaks, who then published them.

Related: Rand Paul Doubles Down: Someone Needs To Go To Jail For Fake Trump Leaks
"This was either leaked by intelligence officials or by Democrats that are part of the elite"

No chain of evidence supporting this claim has been presented to the public, either. But even assuming the assertion is true, an important factor is intentionally being ignored: THE CONTENT OF THOSE LEAKED EMAILS.

In other words, if making all this content publicly available cost Hillary the election, and if no one is seriously questioning the authenticity of the emails, then THE TRUTH undermined Hillary. However, no major media outlet is reporting the story from that angle.

After all, how would this headline look? TRUE CONTENT OF LEAKED EMAILS SINKS HILLARY CLINTON. Or this? HILLARY COULDN’T REFUTE CONTENT OF LEAKED EMAILS AND SO SHE LOST THE ELECTION.



Related: A Demand for Russian ‘Hacking’ Proof

Those headlines would attract millions of clicks. Why weren’t they printed? It’s reasonable to assume big news outlets didn’t want readers to think about the story from that perspective.

Why not? Why was the heavy emphasis put on the hacking of the emails? To obscure the importance of their content: for example, DNC collusion to obstruct and undermine the campaign of Bernie Sanders.

“Let’s make the story all about WHO we claim stole the emails, rather than WHAT THE EMAILS CONTAINED.”

When a tape surfaced in which Trump spoke about women who were eager to have sex with famous men, did major media make the story all about who had the tape and who released it to the press? No.

Perhaps you remember this 2009 email-hack controversy. Wikipedia sums it up:

“The Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as “Climategate”) began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) by an external attacker, copying thousands of emails and computer files, the Climatic Research Unit documents, to various internet locations several weeks before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change.”

One of the most revealing elements in the email exchanges: an obvious attempt to sideline scientific critics of global warming. But major media quickly began to reframe the story.

It was all about illegal hacking, and investigations were launched to determine the criminal.

The contents of the emails were brushed off as “proprietary work product” and “misleading” because “context was missing.”

The case of Edward Snowden was somewhat different. There the media felt compelled to expose the CONTENT of the NSA documents Snowden stole. They also gave considerable space to Snowden himself.

To some degree, this was a fait accompli, because The Guardian newspaper was committed, from the beginning, to publishing NSA documents and an analysis of their meaning - so other media outlets followed suit. Getting the picture?

Big news media decide whether to focus on the WHO or the WHAT, in each case. “Should we give primary coverage to the leaker or what he leaked?”

But that is not a choice you are making. It’s a choice being made for you.



Related: Former Newspaper Editor Who Exposed CIA Found Dead

Government agencies and spokespeople leak news to the press all the time. In these instances, the press doesn’t turn around and launch a probe aimed at exposing the WHO and discovering WHY a particular tidbit was passed along for publication. Newspapers and television news departments simply run with the stories.

“Okay, Bob. Here’s a little gem for you. The White House and the Congress are cooperating on this one. In the next few days, a piece of legislation is going to be inserted into a current bill in the House. It’ll establish a working group to combat ‘fake news’ operations that confuse the public…”

Does Bob bite the hand that feeds him? Does he write a story accusing the White House of trying to knock out independent news competitors who contradict official reality? Of course not. Bob plays along.

Sometimes, both the WHO and the WHAT are censored. Such was the case with CDC whistleblower, William Thompson, who confessed publicly, in August of 2014, that he and colleagues at the CDC committed fraud in a 2004 study of the MMR vaccine and its possible connection to autism.



Related: Journalist, Banned from Facebook & Outspoken on Mainstream “Fake News,” Dead of Heart Attack at 56

Thompson admitted the study was cooked, to make it seem the vaccine didn’t increase the risk of autism, when in fact it did.

The mainstream press put a chokehold on the story. Aside from scattered references, and official denials, the story faded quickly. The leaker and what he was leaking remained in the shadows. Independent news outlets (such as this one) kept the story percolating.

In summary, there is no logic in the mainstream approach to leaks and leakers. These days, the WHO and WHAT are decided on the basis of serving official interests and agendas - and repressing the public interest.

.

As you will see from the transcript and related documents and the video footage of the MPs that spoke at the first Reading (5th of December 2016) – National, Labour and the Greens support the Bill. The Labour Party even want to strengthen the legislation by making it mandated by Central Government just in case a DHB tries to wriggle out of it.

In a press release in December 2016, Labour also condemned the Maori Party for running a poll to find out what people think. Progress on the Bill can be found here

Fluoride & The Brain

Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne, who introduced the Bill, has called us “tin-foil hat wearing, UFO-abducted pseudo-scientists.” He mustn’t realise that he is insulting around half of the NZ population.



Related: Undeniable Evidence From Numerous Studies Proves That Fluoride Causes Cancer

Results from all referenda held in NZ show that people tend to vote status quo. As only half of the country is fluoridated (23 councils out of 67, not “27 councils have rejected fluoridation” as Peter Dunne incorrectly stated) which means that roughly half the population is opposed to fluoridation (or maybe more than half) and if a nationwide referendum was held tomorrow, we would have a good chance of winning.

The NZ First Party thinks the issue should be decided by local referendum. The Greens supported the Bill “at first Reading stage” as they, too, have concerns about local decision-making – but the Greens as a party do think fluoridation is safe and effective. It shows that most of them must only have read the Ministry of Health propaganda.


How to Stop the Legislation

The Government is now giving until the 2nd of February for us to send in written feedback on the issue. The law allows everyone who gives feedback to have 10 minutes speaking time for individuals, and 15 minutes for organisations.

At the Hamilton Tribunal in 2013, 1557 people put in a submission, 1385 opposed fluoridation and 130 people spoke at the hearing to support their submission. That required the councillors to sit through 3.5 days of oral submissions and the result was a 7 to 1 vote to stop fluoridation.



Related: Why Does NZ Still Fluoridate? TV Commercial FFNZ

Unfortunately, some Hamilton councillors who had excused themselves from the Tribunal Hearing because of a conflict of interest, and did not bother to attend the Hearing as part of the audience, subsequently worked to overthrow that decision. (See Hamilton page if you would like more information on that).

Therefore, we urge everyone to give written feedback, and do their utmost to speak to that submission in person. We have been advised that It is best to keep feedback to a page or two with around half a dozen really salient points. The Hearing will be in Wellington, which is likely to be in February or perhaps March next year..


Ways to Give Feedback:

Use this Online Form If you don’t know what to say, a personal testimony is good, or attach an article already written (suggestions here) or list a few points as suggested above. Send hard copy to Health Select Committee, Parliament Buildings, Wellington. It is really good if you can also say you will speak to your submission. This can be done by Skype if you cannot make it to Wellington.

Fluoride Free New Zealand will be providing a comprehensive written submission where we will explain the ineffectiveness and dangers of fluoridation and details of public dental health programmes operating overseas that actually do reduce dental decay.



Related: The Fluoride Deception

Please encourage your friends and family to help us now by sending feedback to the Committee and by informing everyone they know on the facts about fluoridation. The number of people that do this makes a difference!

You can also help by posting respectful and informative comments on Facebook, liking posts and comments and joining the discussions, particularly on the Facebook pages of the Health Select Committee Members. See the list below.

Remember, this is election year. We need to let politicians know we will not vote for them if they introduce this draconian legislation.

Health Select Committee Members
Simon O’Connor, Chairperson, National Party, Tāmaki
email: simon.oconnor@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/SimonOConnorMP

Barbara Kuriger, Deputy-Chairperson, National Party, Taranaki-King Country
email: barbara.kuriger@national.org.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/BarbaraKurigerMP

Jacqui Dean, Member, National Party, Waitaki
email: waitaki.mp@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/JacquiDeanMP

Julie Anne Genter, Member, Green Party, List
email: julieanne.genter@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/JulieAnneGenterMP/

Annette King, Member, Labour Party, Rongotai
email: a.king@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/annette.king.127
www.facebook.com/annette.king.of.rongotai

Shane Reti, Member, National Party, Whangarei
email: shane.reti@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/drshanereti

Scott Simpson, Member, National Party, Coromandel
email: mpcoromandel@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/scottsimpsonmp

Barbara Stewart, Member, NZ First, List
email: barbara.stewart@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/barbarastewartmp

Poto Williams, Member, Labour Party, Christchurch East
email: poto.williams@parliament.govt.nz
facebook: www.facebook.com/poto.williams.7

More Information

Local Government New Zealand’s response to amendments to the Act

Ministry of Health’s position statement on current proposed Legislation

Legislative Disclosure Statement from the Ministry of Health.


Related Articles:

New Zealand Government Plans To Drown Its Citizens In Toxic Fluorides

No Consultation Needed For Stopping Or Starting Fluoridation + Fluoridation Decision Is An Attack On Democracy

Fluoride: Poison On Tap Official Trailer

New Zealand Fluoridation Review Unscientific And Intellectually Dishonest Say International Reviewers

Fluoride Free New Zealand: Dirty Science

Secret Fluoridation Review Totally One-Sided Admits Chair

Harvard Research Finds Link Between Fluoridated Water, ADHD & Mental Disorders

Thanks to the Panama Papers whistleblower, some of the fantastical delusions that most of the world holds about New Zealand, are finally falling to pieces.

Exactly how much public money is spent on maintaining the facade, no one knows. According to this brilliant article by Stuff.co.nz, titled “100% Pure Fantasy? Living Up To Our Brand”:

“The national tourism agency can’t put a dollar figure on the total cost of 100% Pure over its [then] 13-year run, citing commercial sensitivity…”

Indeed the Tourism Authority, which publishes its Three Year Marketing Strategy, has redacted the entire budget allocation section. It is the only segment which has been blacked out.

Astonishingly, the leader of New Zealand likened the country’s tourism marketing to, of all things, a McDonalds meal and infers that the advertising should not be taken seriously. Stuff.co.nz reports:

Prime Minister John Key compared New Zealand’s global “100% Pure” tourism marketing campaign to a fast food ad. “It’s like saying ‘McDonald’s, I’m lovin’ it’ – I’m not sure every moment that someone’s eating McDonald’s, they’re loving it… it’s the same thing with 100% Pure,” he said. “It’s got to be taken with a bit of a pinch of salt.”

The Panama Papers is a prime example of the Prime Minister applying this ‘with a bit of a pinch of salt’ attitude to the international image and reputation of New Zealand . Now the world is beginning to rub its eyes and awaken from the dream that has become a nightmare: ‘100% Pure New Zealand’ is as pure as a Big Mac Combo.

New Zealand Is A Big Mac

According to McDonalds.com a Big Mac contains:

“A double layer of sear-sizzled 100% pure beef mingled with special sauce on a sesame seed bun and topped with melty American cheese, crisp lettuce, minced onions and tangy pickles.”

According to Fooducate.com, a Big Mac contains over 80 ingredients, the vast majority of which are human-manufactured chemical compounds, including:

So this is what our Prime Minister’s political agenda and spin has reduced us to. A Big Mac combo. Looks good and safe in the posters, but it can kill you.

Unfortunately there is a whole lot more under the surface than just dodgy hamburger ingredients. The damage that has been wreaked upon the land, particularly after the last 8 years is vast, profound and potentially irreversible.

It is overdue for us to examine how precisely the Land of the Long White Cloud was so thoroughly desecrated – when, why and who by.


The Big Picture

The 1% run a transnational operation and they collect countries like baseball cards. Once consumed those countries exist in name and our memories only. They are added like stocks to a portfolio, run by the real bond traders – a conglomerate of intelligence agencies that, where New Zealand is concerned, operate under the auspices of the Five Eyes (FVEY).

The countries are asset stripped, resource depleted, socially degraded, legislatively homogenised, privatised, and usually dressed in a worthless rag called ‘democracy’, although in the most lucrative examples, far less savoury, authoritarian regimes are either instituted or welcomed into the Empire’s club.

The only countries that aren’t welcome are those that want to retain their sovereignty, their resources, their societies and their heritage. They then become targets, viewed as ripe for hostile takeover.

Tiered, like a twisted wedding cake in reverse, FVEY holds the vast majority of all the world’s electronic data. A two-way waterfall, it vacuums up everything it can off all those below it, with or without their co-operation, then trickles a portion of it back down over the tiers, in quantities that reflect their diplomatic priority or favoured status.

The harsh truth is that for the countries who have been sucked into this arrangement, there are effectively no governments. The entire charade of politics is precisely that – a pantomime. You could turn the sound off and it would make no tangible difference to the political course of the country which, except in extremely rare circumstances, is not charted by the citizens.

Those extremely rare circumstances are what intelligence and police agencies are in fact hell-bent on avoiding. They are tasked to expend great resources mitigating the risk of actual democracy occurring.

Because democracy is the greatest undelivered promise of the 20th century. Which is why the mask of Western civilisation is set askew by any exercise of democratic rights to dissent – by any mass movement of the people – be it Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, or any other.

The gloves come off. The veneer is shattered. Grotesque, state-sanctioned, publicly funded violence, censorship, suppression, oppression, repression, corruption. On naked display. Democracy in name only.

Our heads of government are civil servants only in the sense that they maintain a public veneer of civility and they are indeed servants – to people who we seldom know the names of and have never voted for.


Who Does New Zealand Belong To, Anyway?

New Zealand’s (noe Ex) Prime Minister John Key frequently accused Kiwis who oppose his policies of being “anti-American.” But the truth is, he is pro-American.

In his May 9th press conference about the Panama Papers revelations, he stated:

“Our relationship with the United States is in the best shape it’s been in for a very, very long time.”

This is unsurprising given that a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York has been in charge of our country for the last 8 years.

According to Wikipedia, the FRBNY is ‘the most important of the banks‘.

So first we get a Prime Minister with a U.S. Federal Reserve seal of approval, then next thing we know, American National Security Agency facilities are revealed on New Zealand soil.

Despite the obvious lack of any foreign bases operating on American soil. Because funnily enough, the Americans do not allow foreign countries to operate bases on their soil.

As I once discovered by reading Bob Woodward’s books, you can often learn more from those who disagree with you than from those who agree. It’s amazing what slips through the cracks. While full of imperial apologism, this link is an absolutely fascinating anatomy of the justifications for US military hegemony that are used to indoctrinate much of the First World.

I highly recommend that you take the time to read the full discussion. There are countless edifying morsels. Also many contradictions.

The various reasonings for American global domination include:

It’s just to save global trade from pirates and criminals

It’s because other countries can’t defend themselves

It’s so other nations don’t have to spend so much on their own military

It’s because “America cooks the dinner and Europe does the dishes“

While more than 90% of the conversation is pro-Empire, eventually the excuses lessen and there are some pretty major insights.

Which indicates that the exercise of US power is less about stopping pirates or protecting trade routes, but actually involves outright malicious invasion and subterfuge to the detriment of its perceived enemies.

Here is another worthy link on the same topic but with a different angle. The author opens with:

“The US military is that house guest of dubious benefit, questionable timing, faulty manners, but impeccable credit. “

What has never been sufficiently explained either in rhetoric or in law is how a Commonwealth Country like New Zealand, supposedly beholden to the British Crown, has American military facilities and direct political influence, seemingly more so than British.

New Zealand is, after all, a corporation. Registered to the Queen of England. So if any foreign nation is to go planting military facilities on our land you’d think it would be hers. Or that they would be at least mildly affronted when another sovereign nation – the United States of America – is so heavily involved in one of their territories.

Yet Britain ostensibly didn’t bat an eyelid at the Edward Snowden revelations about New Zealand. Which suggests that, as with arguably more than 100 other countries, the U.K. has also been thoroughly compromised by the United States.

That from a military perspective, they function as one. That their national interests are aligned.

But this is not how we were raised. We were raised to believe we are a sovereign nation that, when necessary, stands up to the superpowers and exerts an independent foreign policy, even if that comes at a diplomatic or political cost.

Yet how could we ever again engineer and assert a differentiating foreign policy now? With the infrastructure of global oppression present on our soil, hoovering up the private communications of all our citizens, in complete irreverence for our Bill of Rights?

We have to go back 30 years to get a glimpse of a Prime Minister prepared to take personal risks on principle.

One who not only stood against the Americans, but even against the Commonwealth itself, when Prime Minister David Lange went to England to publicly defend our anti-nuclear stance. From the documentary, “Revolution“:

David Lange: “Margaret Thatcher sent a note through her High Commissioner, which he delivered to me, asking me not to do it and that sealed it as far as I was concerned. I told him what I thought of him, and of his new hair dye and various other things like that! And I decided definitely to go, and we settled the terms of the debate. It was one of those interesting occasions when Foreign Affairs were put to the test. I went to the UK without any Foreign Affairs official. It was the only time a Prime Minister has ever travelled out of New Zealand, without a Foreign Affairs official." Interviewer: “Was that because they disapproved…’ David Lange: “Oh, they disapproved completely. ” Interviewer: “Did they try to talk you out of it?” David Lange: “They did… It was unbelievably fraught with danger and yet had such potential for advantage, and I was attracted to it.”

There was of course, despite the risk, a happy ending. Lange’s performance was historic and compelling; he received a standing ovation from both sides of the debate at the Oxford Union – an occurrence the President of the Union said he had never witnessed in 25 years.

In that very debate, Lange spoke to the United States’ reaction to New Zealand’s exertion of its own sovereignty.

Lange: “We are in fact, to be made an example of! We are to be ostracised! We are to be convicted of some form of heresy and put on probation. We are to be kept there until we are compelled to resume our seat in the dress circle of the nuclear theatre.”

The debate was a huge win, for which Lange was internationally lauded.



Yet it was soon followed by an act of terrorism on New Zealand territory, when French agents bombed the Greenpeace flagship, the Rainbow Warrior, killing a New Zealander and sinking the vessel.

David Lange: “It was a defining moment for me because I knew that was the end of any New Zealand commitment to the so-called Western alliance. It was not when it was sunk that I knew, it was when we knew who’d sunk it that I knew. Then the overwhelming silence from Great Britain. Margaret Thatcher was prepared to condemn Gaddafi for everything but the French could go and kill people in our harbour. [Australian Prime Minister] Hawke never said anything. Ronald Reagan pretended total indifference. We never had a peep out of those people that we were allegedly in a Western alliance with, those people who fought for democracy.”

So the UK was silent when an ally committed an act of “state-sponsored terrorism” on its own Commonwealth territory. What a remarkable object lesson.


Rainbow Warrior Sinking 25 Years On - Nine News

New Zealand, however, was not cowed. It upped the ante and passed its nuclear-free legislation into law and was promptly kicked out of the ANZUS defense agreement.

Yet we stood tall and defiant.

David Lange: “The great irony of the last fifteen years of foreign policy, has been that our foreign policy stance had the seeds of its change.. in my government… it was nurtured and watered by the American reprisals, but it was set in a hanging basket by the French. It was all their own work. Thus the bullying of New Zealand had the opposite of its intended effect."

This short video discusses the impact of New Zealand’s past political independence.


New Zealand Anti-Nuclear History: Prominent Kiwis Share Their Views

As Marianne Elliott from ActionStation.co.nz says:

“…it reminds me that it is possible to completely shift a political narrative and to arrive at a political outcome which seemed radical and impossible at the beginning.”

And Peter Douglas:

“…New Zealanders are very proud of the fact that they live in a country that was small but brave enough to make those sort of pronouncements and to suffer the consequences of them at that time.”

The American political and military subjugation of New Zealand that has occurred in this new millennium would once have been considered a literal invasion. Their bases being present on our land, an act of war.

Yet John Key’s government, awash in and drunk on the conspiratorial secrecy of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, has been complicit in playing down the extent of the American infiltration and projected a nonchalance in the face of the recent revelations.

It has openly accelerated our very obvious transition into American vassalage and despite there being no legal precedent outside of various secretive military co-operation agreements, New Zealanders are supposed to ignore or accept the corrosion and ultimately the loss of their natural rights and their national identity.

Patriotism: A Foreign Concept

We are suffering attack after attack on hard-won liberties and allowing the agenda of the global American Empire to dominate all domestic considerations.

An Empire that literally consumes everything it touches. Sucks out all worth and value, asset-strips and impoverishes. Privatises gains and socialises losses.

Kiwis watch in horror as our food is poisoned and we are not even allowed to grow and trade our own anymore; as our oceans are violated; our military is used to suppress lawful protest; our reserve land is raped; our water supplies endangered and/or outright sold; our people become homeless in our own land and our children starve.

While banksters gorge themselves on our heritage, our inheritance and applaud.

We battle for sovereignty, by opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and many other encroaching initiatives that ultimately are intended to strip New Zealand of its lawful authority and jurisdiction, or to supersede it. But with foreign countries dominating our defense landscape and controlling our government by proxy, we have no sovereignty.

Our country is but a hollow shell, relegated to nostalgia.

A country where patriotism has become a foreign concept – a luxury only afforded within the bounds of American Exceptionalism – and even then, the only true loyalty is to capital.

A country where the desecration of our land and the blood and pain of our people is the price of our enslavement to the global 0.00001%. Where humanitarianism is depicted as a dirty word and empathy ill-advised; a privilege; one with strings attached, that attracts blowback.

In a world where narcissists brand the courageous narcissistic; and call the learned naive. Empaths, they call us. They spit it. As if to care about others is the most dirty, heathen concept imaginable to them.

All the while communities are fractured and uprooted and culture is either commercialised or eradicated.


The Most Peaceful Country On Earth

New Zealand has, at various times, been determined to be the most safe, the most peaceful, and the least corrupt country on Earth. The problem is of course, that that is total bullshit.

Bullshit because the impotent indexes themselves are inherently flawed. They prop up a myth that ‘somewhere is OK!’ and provide false hope to the global populace.

But I call bullshit mostly because New Zealand is in fact, unsafe, not at all peaceful, and corrupt. It is however, accomplished at hiding it, and trades on a reputation that is extremely outdated, if not outright misleading.

Street fights are a norm in the central business districts at night, but also happen in broad daylight and in schools.

The fighting is not limited to men. Women are frequently sexually assaulted in New Zealand and when they complain about it, they are more likely to be smeared by the Police than protected.

This appalling website has an almost endless list of the small percentage of incidents that are publicly acknowledged, and states:

Tourists are ‘often targeted’ in New Zealand. Children are not safe in New Zealand either – there are countless instances of horrific child abuse.

Poverty is on the rise. Homelessness is on the rise. Domestic violence is at epidemic levels. Domestic break-ins and petty theft, white-collar fraud abound.

Austerity measures target the physically and mentally disabled, as well as re-victimising rape victims. Sexual abuse is also at epidemic levels in New Zealand, which has the same tacit tolerance of the subjugation and degradation of women as other colonised nations.

Massive co-ordinated civil unrest is now a routine occurrence. Each time the will of the people is thwarted and a social movement ignored, the next movement grows larger. Political corruption is rife. On the rare occasion that it is exposed, it is effectively whitewashed and enabled to continue.

It is inevitable that something has got to give.


What They Didn’t Show You In ‘The Hobbit’

A legacy of John Key’s predecessor, Helen Clark, is the absolute mountains of money spent on international P.R. during the making of Peter Jackson’s ‘Lord Of The Rings’ movies, to promote an image of New Zealand befitting the scenery of the movies: wholesome. Green. Natural. Untouched.

The decades of unregulated fracking of New Zealand farmland makes a mockery of that image. As did the Rena oil spill.

The lifting of sanctuary status from our precious marine reserves, for oil exploration. The fallout from Fukushima.

Not a single shot of the movies features effluent run-off poisoning the waterways.

Soil poisoned by chemicals, on land earmarked residential and sold to unsuspecting home-buyers.

Nor did they show you Hobbits committing suicide at record rates. The National government, is drilling the hell out of Middle Earth.

Yes, in this, the most peaceful, safe and least corrupt country in the world. Where “thousands” of people queue to apply for the same supermarket jobs. At a supermarket that sells meat that has been injected with controversial growth hormones.New Zealand factory farms are notorious for appalling conditions.

Child obesity going through the roof. Adult obesity going through the roof. Citizens who dare protest the above conditions, are being interfered with, stalked, harassed, maligned, abused, assaulted and exiled by the domestic security agencies.

All this under the auspices of the Five Eyes.


The Five Eyes Is Actually The Four Eyes… And The Three Eyes…

Herein lies the great inequality of the intelligence sharing agreements with the United States that New Zealand citizens have been subjected to.

For while we are told that through the FVEY, we are ‘partners’, which supposedly is of significant enough value to justify spying on our entire domestic citizenry and handing all that intelligence over to FOREIGN NATIONS…. it turns out that actually, FVEY is not the top-tier of that twisted, reverse wedding cake.

There is in fact:

Then when the Canadians had a crisis of conscience, quite rightly as history shows us, and refused to join in the destruction of Iraq in 2002, they too effectively got kicked from the club, and the Three Eyes was born.

Making the US, the UK and Australia the top tier of the wedding cake. Right?

Well, actually, no.


The Two Eyes

According to a commenter on electrospaces.net:

Given all the above, we have to ask ourselves. What is New Zealand really gaining by our alignment with Empire?

There is clearly no risk of piracy, or of hostile military invasion. Is it about money? Or just about power?

Was it the price of our appointment to the greatest warmonger’s club of all – the UN Security Council? Where then, would our allegiance lay, if the long-predicted implosion of the American economy and thus empire, were to occur?

It is widely accepted that the castle is built on sand; that a the end of the petrodollar could soon herald an economic collapse that would make 2008 look like the good old days.

No matter what happens, Ex-Prime Minister Key can always retire to his mansion in Hawaii. Or his mansion in London. Or his mansion in Aspen, Colorado. If he doesn’t stay in his mansion in Auckland’s Parnell. Or his Omaha beach house.

New Zealanders have no such luxury – they are sleeping in garage and tents.

While inevitably, study after study will come out claiming that we are a Utopian paradise. Nothing could be further from the truth. If the country in its current form really is the best this world has to offer – we have utterly failed ourselves, this planet, its peoples and our future generations.

For the desecration of New Zealand continues to be tolerated domestically and concealed internationally.

The picture is really bleak and will remain so, until we accept responsibility and rise to change it.

I pray to one day be able to report on how we reversed the trend. But that will take courage, unity and action. Foresight, commitment and integrity.

The corporate mainstream media networks are now experiencing massive symptoms suggesting, without any shadow of doubt, that they are in their death throes.

WashPost Is Richly Rewarded for False News About Russia Threat While Public Is Deceived

In the past six weeks, the Washington Post published two blockbuster stories about the Russian threat that went viral: one on how Russia is behind a massive explosion of “fake news,” the other on how it invaded the U.S. electric grid. Both articles were fundamentally false.

Each now bears a humiliating editor’s note grudgingly acknowledging that the core claims of the story were fiction: The first note was posted a full two weeks later to the top of the original article; the other was buried the following day at the bottom.

The second story on the electric grid turned out to be far worse than I realized when I wrote about it on Saturday, when it became clear that there was no “penetration of the U.S. electricity grid” as the Post had claimed.

In addition to the editor’s note, the Russia-hacked-our-electric-grid story now has a full-scale retraction in the form of a separate article admitting that “the incident is not linked to any Russian government effort to target or hack the utility” and there may not even have been malware at all on this laptop.



Related: Feds Announce Takeover of US Electoral Process

But while these debacles are embarrassing for the paper, they are also richly rewarding. That’s because journalists - including those at the Post - aggressively hype and promote the original, sensationalistic false stories, ensuring that they go viral, generating massive traffic for the Post (the paper’s executive editor, Marty Baron, recently boasted about how profitable the paper has become).

After spreading the falsehoods far and wide, raising fear levels and manipulating U.S. political discourse in the process (both Russia stories were widely hyped on cable news), journalists who spread the false claims subsequently note the retraction or corrections only in the most muted way possible, and often not at all.

As a result, only a tiny fraction of people who were exposed to the original false story end up learning of the retractions.

Baron himself, editorial leader of the Post, is a perfect case study in this irresponsible tactic. It was Baron who went to Twitter on the evening of November 24 to announce the Post’s exposé of the enormous reach of Russia’s fake news operation, based on what he heralded as the findings of “independent researchers.”

Baron’s tweet went all over the place; to date, it has been re-tweeted more than 3,000 times, including by many journalists with their own large followings:



Related: Peskov on US hacking hysteria: "Russia is seriously tired of amateur American witch hunts"

But after that story faced a barrage of intense criticism - from Adrian Chen in the New Yorker (“propaganda about Russia propaganda”), Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone (“shameful, disgusting”), my own article, and many others - including legal threats from the sites smeared as Russian propaganda outlets by the Post’s “independent researchers” - the Post finally added its lengthy editor’s note distancing itself from the anonymous group that provided the key claims of its story (“The Post... does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings” and “since publication of the Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list”).

What did Baron tell his followers about this editor’s note that gutted the key claims of the story he hyped? Nothing. Not a word. To date, he has been publicly silent about these revisions.

Having spread the original claims to tens of thousands of people, if not more, he took no steps to ensure that any of them heard about the major walk back on the article’s most significant, inflammatory claims. He did, however, ironically find the time to promote a different Post story about how terrible and damaging Fake News is:



Whether the Post’s false stories here can be distinguished from what is commonly called “Fake News” is, at this point, a semantic dispute, particularly since “Fake News” has no cogent definition. Defenders of Fake News as a distinct category typically emphasize intent in order to differentiate it from bad journalism.

That’s really just a way of defining Fake News so as to make it definitionally impossible for mainstream media outlets like the Post ever to be guilty of it (much the way terrorism is defined to ensure that the U.S. government and its allies cannot, by definition, ever commit it).

But what was the Post’s motive in publishing two false stories about Russia that, very predictably, generated massive attention, traffic, and political impact? Was it ideological and political - namely, devotion to the D.C. agenda of elevating Russia into a grave threat to U.S. security?

Was it to please its audience - knowing that its readers, in the wake of Trump’s victory, want to be fed stories about Russian treachery? Was it access and source servitude - proving it will serve as a loyal and uncritical repository for any propaganda intelligence officials want disseminated?

Was it profit - to generate revenue through sensationalistic click-bait headlines with a reckless disregard to whether its stories are true? In an institution as large as the Post, with numerous reporters and editors participating in these stories, it’s impossible to identify any one motive as definitive.

Whatever the motives, the effects of these false stories are exactly the same as those of whatever one regards as Fake News. The false claims travel all over the internet, deceiving huge numbers into believing them.

The propagators of the falsehoods receive ample profit from their false, viral “news.” And there is no accountability of the kind that would disincentivize a repeat of the behavior. (That the Post ultimately corrects its false story does not distinguish it from classic Fake News sites, which also sometimes do the same.)

And while it’s true that all media outlets make mistakes, and that even the most careful journalism sometimes errs, those facts do not remotely mitigate the Post’s behavior here.

In these cases, they did not make good faith mistakes after engaging in careful journalism. With both stories, they were reckless (at best) from the start, and the glaring deficiencies in the reporting were immediately self-evident (which is why both stories were widely attacked upon publication).

As this excellent timeline by Kalev Leetaru documents, the Post did not even bother to contact the utility companies in question - the most elementary step of journalistic responsibility - until after the story was published.



Intelligence officials insisting on anonymity - so as to ensure no accountability - whispered to them that this happened, and despite how significant the consequences would be, they rushed to print it with no verification at all.

This is not a case of good journalism producing inaccurate reporting; it is the case of a media outlet publishing a story that it knew would produce massive benefits and consequences without the slightest due diligence or care.

The most ironic aspect of all this is that it is mainstream journalists - the very people who have become obsessed with the crusade against Fake News - who play the key role in enabling and fueling this dissemination of false stories. They do so not only by uncritically spreading them, but also by taking little or no steps to notify the public of their falsity.

The Post’s epic debacle this weekend regarding its electric grid fiction vividly illustrates this dynamic. As I noted on Saturday, many journalists reacted to this story the same way they do every story about Russia:

They instantly click and re-tweet and share the story without the slightest critical scrutiny.



Related: US Intel Report on ‘Russian Hack’ Still Lacks Proof

That these claims are constantly based on the whispers of anonymous officials and accompanied by no evidence whatsoever gives those journalists no pause at all; any official claim that Russia and Putin are behind some global evil is instantly treated as Truth. 

That’s a significant reason papers like the Post are incentivized to recklessly publish stories of this kind. They know they will be praised and rewarded no matter the accuracy or reliability because their Cause - the agenda - is the right one.

On Friday night, immediately after the Post’s story was published, one of the most dramatic pronouncements came from the New York Times’s editorial writer Brent Staples, who said this:



Now that this story has collapsed and been fully retracted, what has Staples done to note that this tweet was false? Just like Baron, absolutely nothing. Actually, that’s not quite accurate, as he did do something: At some point after Friday night, he quietly deleted his tweet without comment.

He has not uttered a word about the fact that the story he promoted has collapsed, and that what he told his 16,000-plus followers - along with the countless number of people who re-tweeted the dramatic claim of this prominent journalist - turned out to be totally false in every respect.



Even more instructive is the case of MSNBC’s Kyle Griffin, a prolific and skilled social media user who has seen his following explode this year with a constant stream of anti-Trump content.

On Friday night, when the Post story was published, Griffin hyped it with a series of tweets designed to make the story seem as menacing and consequential as possible.

That included hysterical statements from Vermont officials - who believed the Post’s false claim - that in retrospect are unbelievably embarrassing.



That tweet from Griffin - convincing people that Putin was endangering the health and safety of Vermonters - was re-tweeted more than 1,000 times. His other similar tweets - such as this one featuring Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy’s warning that Putin was trying to “shut down [the grid] in the middle of winter” - were also widely spread.

But the next day, the crux of the story collapsed - the Post’s editor’s note acknowledged that “there is no indication” that “Russian hackers had penetrated the electricity grid” - and Griffin said nothing.

Indeed, he said nothing further on any of this until yesterday - four days after his series of widely shared tweets - in which he simply re-tweeted a Post reporter noting an “update” that the story was false without providing any comment himself:

In contrast to Griffin’s original inflammatory tweets about the Russian menace, which were widely and enthusiastically spread, this after-the-fact correction has a paltry 289 re-tweets. Thus, a small fraction of those who were exposed to Griffin’s sensationalistic hyping of this story ended up learning that all of it was false.

I genuinely do not mean to single out these individual journalists for scorn. They are just illustrative of a very common dynamic: Any story that bolsters the prevailing D.C. orthodoxy on the Russia Threat, no matter how dubious, is spread far and wide.

And then, as has happened so often, when the story turns out to be false or misleading, little or nothing is done to correct the deceitful effects. And, most amazingly of all, these are the same people constantly decrying the threat posed by Fake News.

A very common dynamic is driving all of this: media groupthink, greatly exacerbated (as I described on Saturday) by the incentive scheme of Twitter.

As the grand media failure of 2002 demonstrated, American journalists are highly susceptible to fueling and leading the parade in demonizing a new Foreign Enemy rather than exerting restraint and skepticism in evaluating the true nature of that threat.

It is no coincidence that many of the most embarrassing journalistic debacles of this year involve the Russia Threat, and they all involve this same dynamic.

Perhaps the worst one was the facially ridiculous, pre-election Slate story - which multiple outlets (including The Intercept) had been offered but passed on - alleging that Trump had created a secret server to communicate with a Russian bank; that story was so widely shared that even the Clinton campaign ended up hyping it - a tweet that, by itself, was re-tweeted almost 12,000 times.



Related: In Stunning Last Minute Power Grab, Obama Designates Election Systems As "Critical Infrastructure"

But only a small percentage of those who heard of it ended up hearing of the major walk back and debunking from other outlets. The same is true of The Guardian story from last week on WikiLeaks and Putin that ended up going viral, only to have its retraction barely noticed because most of the journalists who spread the story did not bother to note it.

Beyond the journalistic tendency to echo anonymous officials on whatever Scary Foreign Threat they are hyping at the moment, there is an independent incentive scheme sustaining all of this.

That Russia is a Grave Menace attacking the U.S. has - for obvious reasons - become a critical narrative for Democrats and other Trump opponents who dominate elite media circles on social media and elsewhere.

They reward and herald anyone who bolsters that narrative, while viciously attacking anyone who questions it.

Indeed, in my 10-plus years of writing about politics on an endless number of polarizing issues - including the Snowden reporting - nothing remotely compares to the smear campaign that has been launched as a result of the work I’ve done questioning and challenging claims about Russian hacking and the threat posed by that country generally.

This is being engineered not by random, fringe accounts, but by the most prominent Democratic pundits with the largest media followings.

I’ve been transformed, overnight, into an early adherent of alt-right ideology, an avid fan of Breitbart, an enthusiastic Trump supporter, and - needless to say  - a Kremlin operative. That’s literally the explicit script they’re now using, often with outright fabrications of what I say (see here for one particularly glaring example).

They, of course, know all of this is false. A primary focus of the last 10 years of my journalism has been a defense of the civil liberties of Muslims. I wrote an entire book on the racism and inequality inherent in the U.S. justice system. My legal career involved numerous representations of victims of racial discrimination.

I was one of the first journalists to condemn the misleadingly “neutral” approach to reporting on Trump and to call for more explicit condemnations of his extremism and lies. I was one of the few to defend Jorge Ramos from widespread media attacks when he challenged Trump’s immigration extremism.

Along with many others, I tried to warn Democrats that nominating a candidate as unpopular as Hillary Clinton risked a Trump victory.


Reality Check: 5 Problems With CIA Claim That Russia Hacked DNC / Podesta Emails

And as someone who is very publicly in a same-sex, inter-racial marriage - with someone just elected to public office as a socialist - I make for a very unlikely alt-right leader, to put that mildly.

The malice of this campaign is exceeded only by its blatant stupidity. Even having to dignify it with a defense is depressing, though once it becomes this widespread, one has little choice.

But this is the climate Democrats have successfully cultivated - where anyone dissenting or even expressing skepticism about their deeply self-serving Russia narrative is the target of coordinated and potent smears; where, as The Nation’s James Carden documented yesterday, skepticism is literally equated with treason.

And the converse is equally true: Those who disseminate claims and stories that bolster this narrative - no matter how divorced from reason and evidence they are - receive an array of benefits and rewards.

That the story ends up being completely discredited matters little. The damage is done, and the benefits received. Fake News in the narrow sense of that term is certainly something worth worrying about.

But whatever one wants to call this type of behavior from the Post, it is a much greater menace given how far the reach is of the institutions that engage in it.

At the rate that they are trying so hard to discredit themselves, a full 2017 may be too generous a timespan for them to collapse.


Cybersecurity Legend McAfee: 'Russian Hack' Is Not True

Soon after Edward Snowden went public with his information that exposed the NSA’s secret spying program, Snowden spoke some words that still ring with curiosity in the ears of many:

While it might be difficult for some to believe that the shadow government / cabal will have their darkness and corruption exposed, the truth is that we are already seeing some of those things come to light, and with so much more to come.

Indeed, there are “good guys” within “The System” working to take down this banking and political elite. 



Related: Virginia Woman Feeds 150 Hungry People for $20: More Proof That the Government Is Obsolete

The first piece of evidence we have on this is what Craig Murray, a former UK ambassador recently said when he told the world that the CIA is lying about Russia being the source of the Wikileaks revelations.

Zerohedge reported on what Murray said:

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.”

In other words, a “good guy” working within The System leaked the information. Someone on the inside is working to expose the shadow government.

The next piece of evidence, though not so covert, is the bill that Tulsi Gabbard proposed in early December of 2016. The “Stop Arming Terrorists Act” proposed by Gabbard aims at stopping the U.S. government from funding and arming ISIL, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Tulsi stated about her proposal:

“If you or I gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would be thrown in jail. Why does our gov get a free pass on this?”

So yet again, we have an insider who is publicly calling out and seeking to end a portion of the madness that the shadow government has created: Funding and arming the same terrorist groups the governments claim to be fighting against.

Though Gabbard’s action on this was public, it was nonetheless a clear move against the shadow government. Of course, her action entirely vindicated what Zerohedge reported all the way back in May of 2015: That the U.S. created and has been funding ISIL.

This move also shows us that something big is still in play. The shadow government hasn’t yet been fully exposed, but there are forces out there in the process of attempting to do so. 

Another event we must recall is back in November of 2015 when Vladimir Putin exposed to the world the fact that Russian Intelligence gathered information that 40 countries were/are funding ISIL.



Though it was later revealed that Turkey was one of those nations, what is most important to evaluate from this disclosure is that this situation is also still in play. Are we really to believe that Putin and Russia will indefinitely sit on their information of the other 39 countries that fund ISIL?

Could it be that Russia is simply waiting for “right timing” to reveal such information? If such information does come out, and we have every reason to believe it will, then it will be a revelation that will impact every aspect of our world. The fallout from it will be enormous.

Perhaps this is one of the biggest reasons the Elite and their media outlets try to demonize Putin as an “evil dictator.”

It appears as though Putin has “the goods” on the global elite…and they know it. Time is almost up. 

According to Wikileaks’ latest big announcement, time indeed may almost be up. Yesterday Wikileaks announced that 2017 would be a very big year:

“If you thought 2016 was a big Wikileaks year 2017 will blow you away. Help @Wikileaks prepare for the showdown.”

This latest announcement falls in line nicely with the belief that there is something still in play.

That an end-game is in sight. 

After all, a showdown is nothing less than a culmination point. It is the end of something that has been in play. 

If there are massive revelations coming in 2017, then what could they be? In an interview with Katie Couric of Yahoo News in December of 2016, Couric asked Edward Snowden: Are there still bombshells (revelations) in this cache of documents that have still not seen the light of day?

Snowden responded:

“I was very careful when I came forward to make sure I never revealed a single secret. This I believe quite strongly is the role of free press in our society. This is why the first amendment is first. They’re charged with making these decisions about what we should know, when and how. They should contest the government’s monopoly on controlling information, particularly the classified spaces. So I’m not going to say if there’s something else coming, or when, but I will say this: In 2013, before this started, the idea that the government was collecting records of every phone call in the United States was a conspiracy theory. It’s not anymore.”

Did Snowden just elegantly and indirectly say that more conspiracy “theories” will be revealed as conspiracy “facts” in the times ahead? Possibly.

While it remains to be seen how this possible end-game plays out in the weeks ahead, it is interesting to ask what, if anything,

Snowden and Wikileaks know about the global collateral accounts; a story which is regarded as the shadow government’s biggest financial cover-up and would certainly be important to the entire political, financial and social sphere of our world.



Related: What’s Happening Outside Keenan’s Reach - The Illegal Casinos Are Closing Down

If an end-game existed, revealing information about these global collateral accounts would certainly become important at some point. Back in August of 2016, former CIA spy Robert Steele became one of the first major figures to publicly speak about these accounts.

Will there be more revelations coming? Is there some sort of positive alliance actually working to expose the lies of the shadow government? Will more “theories” be revealed as “facts?” Will Snowden himself reveal more information?

Donald Trump unilaterally fires all of Obama's ambassadors. This will allow Trump to create a new set of diplomats appointment for their talents rather than how much they donated to the Democrats.

The New York Times first reported that a State Department cable was sent to all ambassadors on December 23 informing them they have to vacate their posts by Jan. 20 “without exceptions.”

Trump has been taking to Twitter to express his consternation over Obama’s campaign of hatred against Russia in his final weeks in power.

By sacking many Obama appointed diplomats, Trump is both symbolically and materially taking the wind out of the foreign policy sails of the Democrats.

The move however has implications beyond the tit for tat psychological war being waged between a lame-duck Obama and the President-elect.


Tucker Carlson Grills Glenn Beck Full Interview on Donald Trump

Trump had long derided Obama for rewarding important diplomatic positions to those who gave substantial financial contributions to his campaign. Famously, Trump mocked Obama for making Caroline Kennedy the US Ambassador to Japan because ‘she was bored’.

Whilst the mainstream media criticise Donald Trump for being a loving father to his children, the reality is that Obama practiced cronyism in politics, far more than Trump ever did in business.

The idea that one could buy an ambassadorial position in an age of terrorism, strained relations between superpowers, and economic uncertainty, is worse than a crime, it is a blunder.

I remain optimistic that as he has already done with his ambassadorial appointment to China, Trump will continue to appoint ambassadors based on talent rather than boredom.


Related Articles:

Russia has no compromising info on Trump or Clinton, report is ‘total bluff’ – Kremlin

Trump Said to Be Told of Unverified Russian Intelligence

What Trump Can Do To Be A Successful President

Trump deserves credit for beating Clinton against all odds: Sanders

‘Dream Team’: Sean Spicer Explains Donald Trump’s ‘Most Talented Cabinet in Modern History"

Bombshell: Obama/DHS Preparing to Overturn Trump Election

Sabotaging The Donald Trump Presidency, All Systems Go!

Britain’s Involvement In CIA Bid To Block Trump’s Inauguration Is Truly The Funniest Fake News Story Yet

Trump Trolls “Fake News” Mainstream Media Over Yellow Journalism

Trump destroys fake press: President-elect Donald Trump trolled “fake news” mainstream reporters trying to smear him, including the “reporters” who claimed he paid Moscow hookers to pee on a bed Obama slept in.

Trump destroyed one reporter in particular who was still asking him about his tax returns – after the election.

“I’m not releasing the tax returns because, as you know, they’re under audit,” Trump told the reporter at a press conference on Wednesday. “…You know, the only ones who care about my tax returns are the reporters.”

The reporter then retorted by claiming “every president since the 70s has released his tax returns.”

“Gee, I’ve never heard that,” the president-elect responded. “I won… I mean, I became president.  No, I don’t think they [the public] care at all.”

The audience cheered.

“First off, I think you learn very little from a tax return,” Trump continued. “What you should do is go down to federal elections and take a look at the [business income] numbers… people have learned a lot about my company - and now they realize my company is much bigger, much more powerful than they ever thought.”

Trump also congratulated the news organizations present who, unlike CNN and Buzzfeed, refused to publish the erotic Trump fan fiction as real news.

4Chan took credit for the fan fiction in which Trump paid prostitutes to pee on a bed President Obama slept in at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow.

The CIA ultimately used the fan fiction as “evidence” in its “report” linking Trump to the Kremlin, to which CNN and Buzzfeed reported as fact without verifying the claim.

“I’m not going to give you a question,” Trump told a CNN reporter at the conference. “I’m not going to give you a question.” “You are fake news!”

Trump To CNN: You're Fake News!

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has released a new batch of documents cataloging the investigation of Democratic Presidential Nominee Hillary Clinton.

The lack of comment by FBI officials has generated more questions than answers about the scale of the investigation into Clinton. The file is 299 pages and many of the documents are part of the basics of building a federal case including the preservation of records, evidence chain of custody, and listing many seized items.

There are many redactions in the documents, however, the context shows the investigation made significant progress before the contested Democratic primary race started in 2016, as most of the documents are dated in 2015.

Many of the documents also reveal the procedures used to conceal details of the FBI’s investigation.

The first document in the file is the initial report titled “Opening of Full Investigation on a Sensitive Investigative Matter (SIM),” which is dated July 10, 2015. It states the investigation is designated as a SIM because of the “connection to a current public official, political appointee or candidate,” which kept the status of the case out of the public domain.



Related: Ministry of Truth: Facebook Launches ‘Journalism Project’ to ‘Improve Media’

The same report also lists the case as a prohibited investigation, which receives special classification for counterintelligence needs.

“Due to the extremely sensitive nature of this investigation and the damage its disclosure could cause, the case will be designated as a prohibited investigation in accordance with Counterintelligence Division Policy Implementation Guide,”the report states.

FBI’s Counterintelligence division requested the preservation of records for multiple lists of email accounts. One list included 422 redacted accounts and another listed 912 accounts. All of the requests are dated August 18, 2015.

On page 235 of the documents, the FBI admits the Office of Inspector General found classified materials on Clinton’s server. This means the FBI knew about this leak well before anything was made public - and while Clinton was publicly denying it the entire time.

Related: U.S. appeals court revives Clinton email suit

The files are also showing signs of details corroborating some pending theories about Hillary Clinton’s corruption scandals, as evidenced by internet forums. Conversation on Twitter has been continuous as users replied to the WikiLeaks tweet, and a lengthy Reddit thread featured many popular users citing specific facts from the documents.

The FBI’s timing in releasing the documents has been questioned as it comes just days after the full report ordered by U.S. President Barack Obama to investigate Russian influence on the election in favor of Donald Trump.

The US government claimed Russian intelligence facilitated a hacker persona named Guccifer 2.0 to steal emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee. The emails were then published by WikiLeaks in July 2016, days before the DNC’s convention.

The claims of Russian responsibility for the hack have been heavily criticized by security experts in the US intelligence community. The original hacker Guccifer, whom the 2.0 moniker is referencing, has also dismissed the US government’s claims as ‘crazy’ in an interview last week.



Related: CIA News Network (CNN) Busted By Wikileaks: Mainstream media continues to be exposed

‘Americans are crazy about the Russian thing and that Russians are invading the United States,’ Guccifer said regarding the Russian hacking claims. ‘It’s crazy … it’s this hysteria you know?’

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has repeatedly stated it was not Russian hackers who were responsible for the DNC leaks. Assange also hinted that it may have been murdered DNC staff member Seth Rich who leaked the documents.

American news media has used the claims of Russian responsibility to dismiss the importance of the information revealed by the email leaks which showed DNC officials favoring the campaign of Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.

The scandal revealed detailed and continuous efforts by DNC officials to get Hillary Clinton selected as the nominee, the most controversial of which involved the DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Schultz was forced to resign the day before the convention began, and was immediately hired by the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

American news media has continued to claim that Russian efforts to influence voters was the cause of Hillary Clinton losing, but largely ignores the content of Hillary Clinton’s numerous scandals, even after the election ended. The result has been a campaign of anti-Russian sentiment which blames the political dysfunction in America on Russian agents, instead of the Democratic party officials who actually influenced the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Last week, President Obama quietly deployed U.S. Special Forces troops to positions along the Russian border, representing one of the more dangerous consequences of the fake news campaign to distract Americans with Russian hacking claims.



Related: CNN RATTLED: Jake Tapper Scrambles to Defend ‘fake news’ report

Anti-Russian sentiment escalated in November after the collective claims of American news media that websites publishing “fake news” were largely responsible for the change in public opinion about Hillary Clinton, which they claim benefitted the campaign of President Donald Trump.

The Free Thought Project was named on the list referenced, however, the list has since been largely discredited.

The fake news campaign was recently punctuated by the provision meant to “counter propaganda and disinformation directed at the United States,”which was embedded in the new National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The fake news campaign has also led to the censorship of alternative media organizations, who have had a significant part in spreading information about corruption such as the DNC sabotage of Bernie Sanders and the various scandals surrounding Hillary Clinton. The Free Thought Project has continuously reported on how American news media has used their own fake news stories to create anti-Russian sentiment, and even profits off of it prior to retractions forced by the facts.

The Assad family belongs to the tolerant Islam of Alawid orientation.
Syrian women have the same rights as men to study, health and education.

Syrian women are not forced to wear the burqa. The Sharia (Islamic law) is unconstitutional.

Syria is the only Arab country with a secular constitution and does not tolerate Islamic extremist movements.

Roughly 10% of the Syrian population belongs to one of the many Christian denominations, all fully integrated in Syrian political and social life.

In other Arab countries the Christian population is less than 1% due to sustained hostility.

Syria has banned genetically modified (GMO) seeds, stating his decision was made in order “to preserve human health,”

Syria has an opening to Western society and culture like no other Arab country.

Its media and universities openly debate the global power elite’s influence in things. This means that they fully grasp the fact that real power in the West lies not in the White House but rather with the complex and powerful grid of elite think-tanks and central banks.

Throughout history there have been five popes of Syrian origin. Religious tolerance is unique in the area.

Prior to the current civil war, Syria was one of the only peaceful countries in the area, having avoided major wars or internal conflicts.

Syria was the only country that admitted Iraqi refugees without any social, political or religious discrimination.

Syria clearly and unequivocally opposes Zionism and the Israel government.

Following a massive oil find in Syria’s Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, Netanyahu recently asked Obama to recognize its annexation of the territory. To consolidate its hold, plans are afoot to quadruple Israeli settler numbers to 100,000.


And The Most Two Important Points:

Syria is one of the only countries in the Middle East without debts to the International Monetary Fund (Pre-invasion Libya & Iran the only others)

Syria is the only Mediterranean country which remains the owner of its oil company, with an oil reserve of 2,500 million barrels, the operation of which has avoided privatization and is reserved exclusively for state-owned enterprises.


So now ask yourself, why are we truly attempting to overthrow yet another government?

What are we hoping to fix here?

If the recent invasions and illegal assassinations of Presidents like Qaddafi and Saddam have taught us anything, it should be the understanding of the blowback effect of such lawless actions by the West and the vacuum of chaos that always supersedes it.

Debt Conquer. Invent a reason to invade and destroy, then offer $Trillions in IMF funding to rebuild… conveniently paid back by control of your oil fields and the free access to build gas pipelines to the west.


Related Articles:

Syria Story Is A Fools Paradise

Western Media Credibility In Free Fall Collapse: Case In Point: UN Peace Council: The US Media Is Lying To The American people. The War In Syria Is Not A Civil War, It's A Proxy Invasion By The United States

Syria: Attack On Aid Convoy Kills Twenty, Destroys Aid, And Obliterates US War Crimes In Support Of ISIS-Daesh Terror Group?

I Am A Syrian Living In Syria: “It Was Never A Revolution Nor A Civil War: The Terrorists Are Sent By Your Government”

The Boy In The Ambulance: US State Dept-Funded Groups Behind Latest 'Iconic Image' Designed To Demonize Russia And Encourage Further Bloodshed In Syria

Checkmate! U.S. Loses Syria & Turkey; Erdogan Will Visit Putin + John McCain Is “Directly Responsible” For ISIS

Clinton Email Reveals: Google Sought Overthrow Of Syria's Assad

In Syria, If You Can’t Find Moderates, Dress Up Some Extremists

Paris-Syria Timeline Of Terror

The End Of The New World Order As Russia Shifts Balance Of Power: Russia's Syrian Operation To Smash Terrorists, End Tyranny Of Banking Elite

Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool" To Overthrow Syria's President Assad & War is Peace: US Needs External Enemy to Ensure Internal Unity

The delegation then met with Syrian President, Bashar Al Assad, on the 9th January 2017. Following the meeting, President Assad met with and fielded questions from French media.

Related: US Backed “Moderate Rebels” Target French Delegation in Aleppo

”We always have hopes that the next (French) administration, or government, or president will want to deal with the reality, to disconnect themselves from the disconnected policy from our reality. That is our hope..and they can work for the interests of the French people. The question now, after six years, as a French citizen, do you feel safer? I dont think the answer is yes. The immigration problem, has it made the situation in your country better? […] This is the question the next administration, government, president should deal with in order to deal with our reality not what is in their imagination as has been happening for the last six years.  (Fillon’s) rhetoric regarding the terrorists, or lets say the priority to fight the terrorists and not meddling in the affairs of other countries are welcome, but we have to be cautious, because what we have learned in this region, during the last few years, is that many officials would say something and do the opposite. I am not saying M Fillon would do this, I hope not, but we have to wait and see because there is no contact. But so far, what he is saying, if it is implemented, that will be very good.  If I want to send (a message to French politicians) I would say the self evident thing, that we have to work for the interests of the Syrian citizens, and for the last six years the situation is going in the opposite direction. The French politics harmed the French interests. For the French people, I would say the mainstream media has failed in most of the west, the narrative has been debunked because of the reality and you have the alternative media, you have to look for the truth.  Truth was the main victim of the events in the Middle East, including Syria. I would ask any citizen in France, please search for the reality, for the real information, through the alternative media. When they search for this information, they can be more effective, in dealing with their government, or at least not allowing some politicians to base their politics on lies. ”

Related: Who Are Syria's White Helmets?

US ruling power is in deep trouble because there are growing signs that the mass of citizens are no longer beholden to the supposed authority residing in Washington.

"The so-called American Deep State comprising the military-intelligence apparatus and its operatives in the political and media establishment has put its credibility on the line over allegations of Russian interference in the US elections."

"What’s the big deal? asks Trump’s supporters on Russian hacking report”.

Trump is quite a hit in Russia - here he is on sugar packaging in a Russian store

Related: How Trump May Have Just Caused Russia to Fall Back in Love with the USA

"Sore losers”, “sour grapes”, “crybabies” and “absurd” were just some of the disbelieving responses from ordinary folks about claims that Russian agents directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin had tipped the US November election in favor of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton." “I don’t believe the [US] intel report,” said one man in Louisiana. “Why is everybody so afraid of Russia? I’m not against Putin.”

"From the parts of the [US intel] report I’ve seen it seems silly.”

.



This was not the response that the spooks wanted from Trump. The CIA and their surrogates in the Obama administration, Congress and the media were building up the US intel report like a witch-hunt against anyone who dares to dissent from the allegations of Russian cyber interference.

Unlike warmongering Congress members such as John McCain and Lyndsey Graham, Trump has not jumped on the bandwagon to demonize Russia.

"And the thing is that people beyond the thrall of the Deep State centered in Washington appear to agree with Trump. At a time of immense social challenges from poverty, unemployment, financial indebtedness, deteriorating infrastructure and public services, and so on, a US policy of hostility towards Russia seems like an alien distraction. A contemptible waste of priority and resources, not to say a reckless drumbeat to war between nuclear powers."

Shocker: 'Proof' of Russia's Trump Support Was Compiled During Obama's Election

The US intelligence agencies, aided by the Obama White House and mainstream media, tried to muster gravitas to play its “Russian card” against Trump.

But Trump and the popular sentiment out there are not responding in the deferential manner expected by the spooks.

In fact, despite sensationalist headlines in the mainstream media about “Putin ordering an influence campaign to help Trump win the election”, the US intelligence agencies are now in real danger of being exposed as ridiculous liars.



The collapse of the US establishment has been underway for sometime, but lately the momentum has quickened with the election of Trump and the mainstream media’s penchant for “fake narratives”.

Last week the Washington disgraced itself by running a story about Russia hacking into the US electric, a story which was quickly exposed as “fake news”.

On the latest US intel report, as well as Trump and ordinary Americans, many observers from around the world were taken aback by the amateurish dearth of evidence and generally low quality of analysis. Independent cyber security experts, including US-based ones, poured scorn on the claims against Russia.

Related: US Readiness to ‘Throw Rocks’ at Russia Marks Need for Policy U-Turn – Ex-Adviser to Trump

The US spy agencies claim that they have “supporting evidence” that Russia hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails, but they say, unconvincingly, that they can’t disclose the information in order to protect “sensitive sources and methods”. Such a conjuring trick just makes the US spooks and the subservient news media look even more ridiculous.



A major giveaway was the disproportionately huge focus that the US intelligence report devoted to trying to discredit Russian news media outlets, RT and Sputnik.

The report claims that the news services are part of the Kremlin’s “influence campaign” and then cites its own ropey rationale as “evidence” that Russia hacked the US election.

If that’s the best that America’s “national security guardians” can come up with then we can be sure their case against Russia is null and void.

There was a time in the American past when shadowy, unelected elites could control society through monopolistic, servile media and servile politicians kowtowing to their supposed authority.

There was also a naive belief among people that the secret services were defending the nation’s best interests.

Not any more alas. People have got wise to the massive manipulation and criminality of such shadowy powers who orchestrate wars and regime changes all around the world for the narrow benefit of elite corporate power.

Ordinary Americans pay with their lives and livelihoods for the machinations of the ruling cabal.

"The Deep State intel chiefs may have been fawned over by Obama, Congress and the media in their outlandish claims of Russian subversion. But growing numbers of ordinary people in the US and around the world can see through the lies and blatant agenda of hostility towards Russia – an insane hostility that only serves the elite interests of the Deep State."

The once feared, and revered, US Deep State is now facing a deep dilemma and maybe even an existential crisis. For it knows deep down that its erstwhile credibility and authority are shot to pieces.





Down through history, the American rulers got away with their charade of inciting wars and conflicts through false flags and contrived catastrophes: the not-so-secret Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the fabricated Gulf of Tonkin incident that escalated the US genocidal war on Vietnam, the dubious 9/11 terror attacks and Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction, to mention just a few.

This same warmongering American ruling class want another arms race, Pentagon-pumping Cold War with Russia. But this time they have played a card that is all too evidently blank. The US spooks and their elitist establishment know that Trump, the American people, Russia and the rest of world all know that they have nothing to offer.

Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.

Related: Technocracy: A Scientific Dictatorship

This is a highly complex piece of equipment. On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable. On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.

When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.

And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications. Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion?

And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?



Related: "Smart City" Is Really Government Spying On An Unimaginable Scale

Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.

But engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Hunger, disease, and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the uncompromising blueprint.

This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.

Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.

Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives.

Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.



Related: Technocracy: evolution told as a fairy tale

The individual would be inserted into a pre-ordained slot. He would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.

Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization.

What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.

Among sincere technocrats, the overall vision superseded the glaring problems.

But…other people entered the game. High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population. Control was their goal. Period. What happened to the individual in the process was of no concern to them. The individual had freedom or he didn’t have freedom, and the Globalists overtly intended to wipe out that freedom.

Erasing hunger, poverty, illness? Nonsense.

For the Globalists, those realities would be exacerbated. Sick, weak, and debilitated people were easier to rule and control and manage.

Essentially, a vastly misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.

In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy. A locomotive is a society? No.



That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly psychotic.

Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief.

They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories - greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; engineering production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guides.

If you track down the specifics that sit under these pronouncements, you discover you discover a warped system of planning that delivers misery and de facto slavery to the global population.



Related: Fabian Socialist Society

The collective utopia turns out to be a sham. Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.

A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.


Related Articles:

Minds Like Machines

Robert Steele: The Soft Coup Collapses

Military Coups, Regime Change…: The CIA Has Interfered In Over 81 Foreign Elections…

As We Move Into 2017: The Cracks in the Empire are Here… How will the U.S. Empire Dissolve?

The Op: Unelected Agents Now Infiltrating ‘Critical Infrastructures’

Obama Regime Moves To Federalize Elections

Editing Reality: Former Employees Admit Facebook Censors Conservative News

With the sudden, bizarre rise of the “Fake News” accusations throughout the entire Corporate Media megaphone and the equally bizarre and totally unsubstantiated CIA allegations that the Russians had stolen the election for Donald Trump, this topic is highly pertinent.

Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers - from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption - could objectively be categorized as a “conspiracy theory” but such words are never applied.

Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval.



Related: The 70 Greatest Conspiracy Theories in Pop-Culture History

Put another way, there are good “conspiracy theories” and bad “conspiracy theories,” with the former being the ones promoted by pundits on mainstream television shows and hence never described as such.

I’ve sometimes joked with people that if ownership and control of our television stations and other major media outlets suddenly changed, the new information regime would require only a few weeks of concerted effort to totally invert all of our most famous “conspiracy theories” in the minds of the gullible American public.

The notion that nineteen Arabs armed with box-cutters hijacked several jetliners, easily evaded our NORAD air defenses, and reduced several landmark buildings to rubble would soon be universally ridiculed as the most preposterous “conspiracy theory” ever to have gone straight from the comic books into the minds of the mentally ill, easily surpassing the absurd “lone gunman” theory of the JFK assassination.

Even without such changes in media control, huge shifts in American public beliefs have frequently occurred in the recent past, merely on the basis of implied association.

In the initial weeks and months following the 2001 attacks, every American media organ was enlisted to denounce and vilify Osama Bin Laden, the purported Islamicist master-mind, as our greatest national enemy, with his bearded visage endlessly appearing on television and in print, soon becoming one of the most recognizable faces in the world.



But as the Bush Administration and its key media allies prepared a war against Iraq, the images of the Burning Towers were instead regularly juxtaposed with mustachioed photos of dictator Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden’s arch-enemy.

As a consequence, by the time we attacked Iraq in 2003, polls revealed that some 70% of the American public believed that Saddam was personally involved in the destruction of our World Trade Center.

By that date I don’t doubt that many millions of patriotic but low-information Americans would have angrily denounced and vilified as a “crazy conspiracy theorist” anyone with the temerity to suggest that Saddam had not been behind 9/11, despite almost no one in authority having ever explicitly made such a fallacious claim.

These factors of media manipulation were very much in my mind a couple of years ago when I stumbled across a short but fascinating book published by the University of Texas academic press. The author of Conspiracy Theory in Americawas Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, a former president of the Florida Political Science Association.

Based on an important FOIA disclosure, the book’s headline revelation was that the CIA was very likely responsible for the widespread introduction of “conspiracy theory” as a term of political abuse, having orchestrated that development as a deliberate means of influencing public opinion.

During the mid-1960s there had been increasing public skepticism about the Warren Commission findings that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been solely responsible for President Kennedy’s assassination, and growing suspicions that top-ranking American leaders had also been involved.

So as a means of damage control, the CIA distributed a secret memo to all its field offices requesting that they enlist their media assets in efforts to ridicule and attack such critics as irrational supporters of “conspiracy theories.”

Soon afterward, there suddenly appeared statements in the media making those exact points, with some of the wording, arguments, and patterns of usage closely matching those CIA guidelines.

The result was a huge spike in the pejorative use of the phrase, which spread throughout the American media, with the residual impact continueing right down to the present day. Thus, there is considerable evidence in support of this particular “conspiracy theory” explaining the widespread appearance of attacks on “conspiracy theories” in the public media.



But although the CIA appears to have effectively manipulated public opinion in order to transform the phrase “conspiracy theory” into a powerful weapon of ideological combat, the author also describes how the necessary philosophical ground had actually been prepared a couple of decades earlier.

Around the time of the Second World War, an important shift in political theory caused a huge decline in the respectability of any “conspiratorial” explanation of historical events.

For decades prior to that conflict, one of our most prominent scholars and public intellectuals had been historian Charles Beard, whose influential writings had heavily focused on the harmful role of various elite conspiracies in shaping American policy for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, with his examples ranging from the earliest history of the United States down to the nation’s entry into WWI.

Obviously, researchers never claimed that all major historical events had hidden causes, but it was widely accepted that some of them did, and attempting to investigate those possibilities was deemed a perfectly acceptable academic enterprise.

However, Beard was a strong opponent of American entry into the Second World War, and he was marginalized in the years that followed, even prior to his death in 1948. Many younger public intellectuals of a similar bent also suffered the same fate, or were even purged from respectability and denied any access to the mainstream media.

At the same time, the totally contrary perspectives of two European political philosophers, Karl Popper and Leo Strauss, gradually gained ascendancy in American intellectual circles, and their ideas became dominant in public life.

Popper, the more widely influential, presented broad, largely theoretical objections to the very possibility of important conspiracies ever existing, suggesting that these would be implausibly difficult to implement given the fallibility of human agents; what might appear a conspiracy actually amounted to individual actors pursuing their narrow aims.

Even more importantly, he regarded “conspiratorial beliefs” as an extremely dangerous social malady, a major contributing factor to the rise of Nazism and other deadly totalitarian ideologies.

His own background as an individual of Jewish ancestry who had fled Austria in 1937 surely contributed to the depth of his feelings on these philosophical matters.

Meanwhile, Strauss, a founding figure in modern neo-conservative thought, was equally harsh in his attacks upon conspiracy analysis, but for polar-opposite reasons.

In his mind, elite conspiracies were absolutely necessary and beneficial, a crucial social defense against anarchy or totalitarianism, but their effectiveness obviously depended upon keeping them hidden from the prying eyes of the ignorant masses.

His main problem with “conspiracy theories” was not that they were always false, but they might often be true, and therefore their spread was potentially disruptive to the smooth functioning of society.

So as a matter of self-defense, elites needed to actively suppress or otherwise undercut the unauthorized investigation of suspected conspiracies.

Even for most educated Americans, theorists such as Beard, Popper, and Strauss are probably no more than vague names mentioned in textbooks, and that was certainly true in my own case. But while the influence of Beard seems to have largely disappeared in elite circles, the same is hardly true of his rivals.

Popper probably ranks as one of the founders of modern liberal thought, with an individual as politically influential as left-liberal financier George Soros claiming to be his intellectual disciple.



Related: George Soros’ World is Falling Apart, Blames Everyone but Himself

Meanwhile, the neo-conservative thinkers who have totally dominated the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement for the last couple of decades often proudly trace their ideas back to Strauss.

So, through a mixture of Popperian and Straussian thinking, the traditional American tendency to regard elite conspiracies as a real but harmful aspect of our society was gradually stigmatized as either paranoid or politically dangerous, laying the conditions for its exclusion from respectable discourse.

By 1964, this intellectual revolution had largely been completed, as indicated by the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the famous article by political scientist Richard Hofstadter critiquing the so-called “paranoid style” in American politics, which he denounced as the underlying cause of widespread popular belief in implausible conspiracy theories.

To a considerable extent, he seemed to be attacking straw men, recounting and ridiculing the most outlandish conspiratorial beliefs, while seeming to ignore the ones that had been proven correct.



For example, he described how some of the more hysterical anti-Communists claimed that tens of thousands of Red Chinese troops were hidden in Mexico, preparing an attack on San Diego, while he failed to even acknowledge that for years Communist spies had indeed served near the very top of the U.S. government.

Not even the most conspiratorially minded individual suggests that all alleged conspiracies are true, merely that some of them might be.

Most of these shifts in public sentiment occurred before I was born or when I was a very young child, and my own views were shaped by the rather conventional media narratives that I absorbed. Hence, for nearly my entire life, I always automatically dismissed all of the so-called “conspiracy theories” as ridiculous, never once even considering that any of them might possibly be true.

To the extent that I ever thought about the matter, my reasoning was simple and based on what seemed like good, solid common sense. Any conspiracy responsible for some important public event must surely have many separate “moving parts” to it, whether actors or actions taken, let us say numbering at least 100 or more.

Now given the imperfect nature of all attempts at concealment, it would surely be impossible for all of these to be kept entirely hidden. So even if a conspiracy were initially 95% successful in remaining undetected, five major clues would still be left in plain sight for investigators to find.



And once the buzzing cloud of journalists noticed these, such blatant evidence of conspiracy would certainly attract an additional swarm of energetic investigators, tracing those items back to their origins, with more pieces gradually being uncovered until the entire cover-up likely collapsed.

Even if not all the crucial facts were ever determined, at least the simple conclusion that there had indeed been some sort of conspiracy would quickly become established.

However, there was a tacit assumption in my reasoning, one that I have since decided was entirely false. Obviously, many potential conspiracies either involve powerful governmental officials or situations in which their disclosure would represent a source of considerable embarrassment to such individuals.

But I had always assumed that even if government failed in its investigatory role, the dedicated bloodhounds of the Fourth Estate would invariably come through, tirelessly seeking truth, ratings, and Pulitzers. However, once I gradually began realizing that the media was merely “Our American Pravda” and perhaps had been so for decades, I suddenly recognized the flaw in my logic.



If those five - or ten or twenty or fifty - initial clues were simply ignored by the media, whether through laziness, incompetence, or much less venial sins, then there would be absolutely nothing to prevent successful conspiracies from taking place and remaining undetected, perhaps even the most blatant and careless ones.

In fact, I would extend this notion to a general principle. Substantial control of the media is almost always an absolute prerequisite for any successful conspiracy, the greater the degree of control the better.

So when weighing the plausibility of any conspiracy, the first matter to investigate is who controls the local media and to what extent.

Let us consider a simple thought-experiment. For various reasons these days, the entire American media is extraordinarily hostile to Russia, certainly much more so than it ever was toward the Communist Soviet Union during the 1970s and 1980s.

Hence I would argue that the likelihood of any large-scale Russian conspiracy taking place within the operative zone of those media organs is virtually nil.



Indeed, we are constantly bombarded with stories of alleged Russian conspiracies that appear to be “false positives,” dire allegations seemingly having little factual basis or actually being totally ridiculous.

Meanwhile, even the crudest sort of anti-Russian conspiracy might easily occur without receiving any serious mainstream media notice or investigation.

This argument may be more than purely hypothetical. A crucial turning point in America’s renewed Cold War against Russia was the passage of the 2012 Magnitsky Act by Congress, punitively targeting various supposedly corrupt Russian officials for their alleged involvement in the illegal persecution and death of an employee of Bill Browder, an American hedge-fund manager with large Russian holdings.

However, there’s actually quite a bit of evidence that it was Browder himself who was actually the mastermind and beneficiary of the gigantic corruption scheme, while his employee was planning to testify against him and was therefore fearful of his life for that reason.



Naturally, the American media has provided scarcely a single mention of these remarkable revelations regarding what might amount to a gigantic Magnitsky Hoax of geopolitical significance.

To some extent the creation of the Internet and the vast proliferation of alternative media outlets, including my own small webzine, have somewhat altered this depressing picture.

So it is hardly surprising that a very substantial fraction of the discussion dominating these Samizdat-like publications concerns exactly those subjects regularly condemned as “crazy conspiracy theories” by our mainstream media organs.

Such unfiltered speculation must surely be a source of considerable irritation and worry to government officials who have long relied upon the complicity of their tame media organs to allow their serious misdeeds to pass unnoticed and unpunished.

Indeed, several years ago a senior Obama Administration official argued that the free discussion of various “conspiracy theories” on the Internet was so potentially harmful that government agents should be recruited to “cognitively infiltrate” and disrupt them, essentially proposing a high-tech version of the highly controversial Cointelpro operations undertaken by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI.

Until just a few years ago I’d scarcely even heard of Charles Beard, once ranked among the towering figures of 20th century American intellectual life. But the more I’ve discovered the number of serious crimes and disasters that have completely escaped substantial media scrutiny, the more I wonder what other matters may still remain hidden.

So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.

Related: ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ Max Spiers Found Dead Days After Texting His Mother to Investigate if Anything ‘Happened to Him’

It’s one of the largest child sex abuse cases in history. A year-long special investigation called “Operation Darkroom” resulted in the seizure of 150 terabytes of data material in the form of photos, movies and chat logs containing atrocities against children as young as infancy, Norwegian police announced at a news conference in late November.

So while the U.S. media busied itself with its campaign of denial, lies and cover ups involving Pizzagate and “fake news,” this huge child sex abuse story broke in Norway. The story did appear on Associated Press’ wire, but did anyone run it?

The infamous crime syndicate rags The Washington Post had the story briefly on Nov. 20 but has since taken it offline, as did The New York Times. German state news group Deutsche Welle and UK Independent provided a brief story, and Sputnik ran a more thorough article. Fox News still has this up – but would a thinking person even call this coverage?

It is a truly remarkable story with global implications. Take special note of the shocking file size - 150 terabytes! It’s too horrible to even contemplate. To put this into context, the Library of Congress holds about 600 terabytes of Web data. Its online archive grows at a rate of about 5 terabytes per month.

Also note the horrifically sadistic nature of the material seized. And note that police are investigating the reach as worldwide, which means it involves a massive scale of evil filth. But nobody in the criminally compliant mainstream media thinks its newsworthy.

Adding insult to public-service journalism injury, the crime syndicate has shifted gears and rolled out entertainment media to mock and lecture you. If you can stomach it, watch Stephen Colbert (below) reading unnaturally off of a script about fake news, Pizzagate and Michael Flynn.

He engages in the same straw-man arguments we covered in our critique of the The New York Times’ skuldruggery. Colbert puts forth all the usual deceptions involving Hillary Clinton, tunnels and basements before declaring Pizzagate was politically motivated and fake. When you see this particular narrative, know that you are being gas-lighted and diverted. 

Yeah, laugh it up, fellas. The New Nationalist (TNN) has said from the beginning that Pizzagate is a poor term. We prefer pedogate. This goes far beyond just one perv hangout pizzeria. And, of course, it transcends the political spectrum, which explains why there is no investigation. 

The assertion that Pizzagate “fake news” is “right-wing” inspired is a scam. Perhaps it’s because of the word “nationalist” in the name of our website that the media keeps citing us in its narratives.

And just below our masthead, it very clearly states that TNN is third position, meaning beyond the Hegalian left-right dialectic. 

We are true humanists, who insist on protecting children from criminals.





Related Articles:

Hillary Clinton Connected To Norway Pedophile Ring

Homosexual George Bush Pedophile Sex Ring and Blackmail of Congress

Clintons, Soros Implicated In Norway

5 Questions for Gareth ‘Cheapest Pizza’ Morgan and his ‘Opportunities Party’ #TOPNZ

Hollywood Paedophiles Exposed

California just decriminalized child prostitutes beginning Jan 1… “legalization” stirs outrage

Epic! Hero Uber Driver Saves Little Girl from Sex Slavery – Then Praises Trump

State Department & Jeffrey Epstein Tied to Child Trafficking Operation

Pope Francis proclaims ‘zero tolerance’ to child molesters

“Trafficking” and Jeffrey Epstein w/ Conchita Sarnoff

Largest Pedophile Ring In History, 70,000 Members, Heads Of State, The Rats Scramble

Nicole Kidman’s Father Dies Amid Pedophile, Child Murder Ring Allegations

Reddit Bans "Pizzagate" - "We Don't Want Witchhunts On Our Site" + #Pizzagate Was Merely Code For Child Sex Trafficking

“Pizzagate”: How 4Chan Uncovered The Sick World Of Washington’s Occult Elite + The Clinton Child Sex
Trafficking Network: A Comprehensive Guide

Satanic Pedophilia Network Exposed In Australia - It Starts At The TOP, Just Like In The USA And UK

Retired Head Of Los Angeles FBI Tells All: Illuminati, Satanism, Pedophile Rings

PizzaGate Is 100% Real, Why Is Media Lying?

PizzaGate is entirely real, which is perhaps why the massive mainstream media cover-up attempt - to label PizzaGate as a "fake news onslaught" (whatever that is) without reviewing ANY of the pertinent facts or Wikileaks emails - is so troubling for those of us with a moral compass.

They're covering for a child trafficking and abuse ring operating in Washington, DC. That is not okay. None of this is okay.






10 Reasons Operation Darkroom Was Covered Up!

What is Operation Darkroom? Why is the mainstream media, trying so hard to cover it up?








Savile and the 9th Circle

PedoGate (PizzaGate) Connection to “Finders” Cult Protected by CIA, Chinese Pedophilia

Related: PedoGate PizzaGate Origins - CIA, Political and Financial Elites Featured in this Pedophilia Special

As my readers know, I reported, factually, on the Boston Marathon alleged bombing case. I interviewed carefully the pro bono attorney, John Remington Graham, who intervened in behalf of the Russian aunt, a lawyer in the Russian Federation, in behalf of the falsely convicted younger Tsarnaev brother, Dzhokhar, the older brother having been murdered by the FBI.

The orchestrated threat was also used for a practice exercise in closing down one of America’s largest cities in order to manhunt with intent to kill a young man chosen as the villain for the orchestrated event.



Related: Here’s why Nazionists Launched Multiple False Flag Operations this Year

American citizens were forced at gunpoint out of their homes while Homeland Security, a Nazi reminiscent name from the Hitler era, disrupted the life of an entire city and its airport service in behalf of this orchestrated event that murdered American civil liberty.

The entire exercise was based on a lie, an event that never happened, like Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and so forth. Just another lie in behalf of the “exceptional people.”

A number of websites have disproved the false case against the Tsarnaev brothers. Attorney John Remington Graham has brought the case to the justice authorities, but the US Department of Justice (sic) has no interest whatsoever in justice.

Now comes forward an attorney, Mary Maxwell with a book. It is available online free. I read the first eight chapters, which was sufficient to comfirm me in my independent conclusion that there was no Boston Marathon bombing by terrorists.

I recommend to you Mary Maxwell’s account. However, I will say that I believe that she uses irony excessively and that on occasions her irony gets in the way of the factual message. Knowing this, stick with it, and read her account.

Irony is the style that she has chosen, and we must respect a person prepared to stand up to the murderous American establishment and to challenge one of the founding myths of the American Police State and Washington’s wars against the world.

Read her book Marathon Bombing - Indicting the Players here.

Any US citizen that believes the falsified case of the Boston Marathon bombing is a dangerous and direct threat to American civil liberty and to the lives of millions of people on planet Earth.

If Americans do not wake up to the orchesrations to which they are subjected, they will forfeit their freedom. The Russians and the Chinese are individually and together more powerful than Washington, and they are not going to put up with the lies with which insouciant Americans are content.

If Americans cannot take back their country from self-serving oligarchs, Americans are doomed.

Related: 9/11 False Flag Conspiracy - Finally Solved (Names, Connections, Motives)




15 Ways To Detect A False Flag Operation

A false flag formula is becoming readily apparent in the face of so many mass shootings and bombings in the US. The phenomenon has become so commonplace in the last 3 years that it’s becoming more American than apple pie.



According to ShootingTracker.com, there have been 353 mass shootings in the USA for 2015 so far. However, as scary as that number is, the good news is that you don’t have to be afraid of them like you may think. A very large number of them - and all of them with any mass media significance and attention – are false flag staged terror events.

Related: False Flag Terror. A Historical Overview

Some have real victims, some do not, but either way, the most criminal of all institutions – the Government – is the orchestrating force behind them.

They are scripted, pre-planned operations which are definitely not the result of random gun violence. Just as Obama stated (by hiding the truth in plain sight), there is a pattern behind these mass shootings. The Controllers are following a definite false flag formula.

Below is a list of the top 15 elements of this formula, which you can now use to detect a false flag operation as it occurs:


False Flag Formula #1: Drill at the Same or Nearby Time and Place

The exercise or drill – at the same time, at the same place – has became the sine qua non or indispensable element of the recent false flag operation. Sometimes there are slight variations on this when the Government plans a drill nearby (a few miles away) rather than at the exact place, or plans a drill earlier on in the day, so it can just coincidentally “go live”.



There was a twist in the case of the recent San Bernardino shooting: the Government planned regular drills in the building where the shooting took place every month! (Think about it – what are the chances of a real mass shooting occurring in a building used for mass shooting drills?)

As Captain Eric H. May, a former US Army military intelligence officer, stated:

“The easiest way to carry out a false flag attack is by setting up a military exercise that simulates the very attack you want to carry out."

In the case of 9/11, there were no less than 46 drills occurring simultaneously during the event, according to Webster Tarpley, author of Synthetic Terror: Made in USA.

In the case of the London 7/7 bombings, Peter Power admitted on radio that he was leading a team who were training for that exact scenario when it unfolded!



There were active shooter drills in all of the false flag attacks of Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon, Charleston, San Bernardino, the Norway attack, the 2nd Paris attack of 2015 and many many more.

What’s the point of having a drill at the same time and place? Here are a few of its purposes:

1. Distract and remove key personnel who would otherwise be at the scene to contain and investigate it;

2. Confuse other personnel who will treat the whole event in a different way if they think it is a drill rather than a real event;

3. Slow down, reduce or eliminate an effective response, especially of police and other law enforcement, given the removal and confusion of personnel;

4. Distract and confuse witnesses, the media and the public in general;

5. Provide a great cover and period of lower defenses and security to carry out an attack, which would otherwise be difficult or impossible if defenses were at their usual or optimal operating level.

False Flag Formula #2: Foreknowledge

Another way you can tell that a mass shooting is a false flag op is if you find proof of foreknowledge of the event. As it so happens, all of the notorious and publicized mass attacks of late have had evidence of foreknowledge. Going way back in time, there was foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack of 1941 that got the US into World War 2.



There were many aspects of foreknowledge on 9/11, including the BBC reporting WTC7 falling before it actually did, and mysterious calls to people like author Salman Rushdie and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown advising them not to fly to NYC on Sept. 11th. Sandy Hook had blatant foreknowledge (with various webpages put up days before the event), as did the Boston Marathon.


False Flag Formula #3: Eyewitnesses Have Conflicting Accounts

You can also spot a likely false flag operation when you see or hear of multiple conflicting witness accounts. In the case of the Aurora Colorado “Batman” mass shooting, eyewitnesses claimed they saw an entire team of shooters, rather than the single shooter James Holmes of the official narrative.

With Sandy Hook, we saw multiple scenes of law enforcement chasing men into the surrounding forest, yet the official narrative declares the only shooter was Adam Lanza. In San Bernardino, too, witnesses stated they saw 3 white athletic men, not the 2 brown husband-and-wife team we were told did the shooting.



Related: 1 Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Filed Against MSM For Staging 'Sandy Hook'

Conflicting eyewitness accounts can destroy the official narrative no matter what the detail is. On 9/11, various fireman told us there were bombs in the building, contradicting the official story that planes alone took down the Twin Towers. With Sandy Hook, Gene Rosen’s testimony itself was full of holes and was contradicted by that of the school bus driver and the official report.


False Flag Formula #4: MSM Quickly Name and Demonize the Patsy

Have you ever wondered how quickly the MSM (Mainstream Media) discovers the name of the patsy? They had somehow deduced that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 just hours after the attacks.

Have you ever wondered why the Government is so good at telling us who supposedly executed these attacks right after they happen, with almost no time to investigate, yet can’t seem to manage to actually stop these alleged terror attacks?



Related: President Putin Reveals Possession Of 9/11 Satellite Imagery Evidence Indicating US Government Complicity In False Flag Attack

Without any evidence, the MSM endlessly repeated “bin Laden” like a crazy mantra after 9/11, despite the fact bin Laden himself denied involvement in the attacks and that in the end he was never formally charged by the FBI. 

Have you ever wondered why many of the patsies, or sorry, deranged mass shooters, are Muslim? That wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that the Zionist Government and MSM are trying to paint all Muslims as crazy and scary, would it? Nothing like a good dose of Islamophobia to take your freedom away …


False Flag Formula #5: Patsy Has No Military Training, Yet Shoots Extremely Fast and Accurately

Another element of the false flag formula is the skilled and lethal patsy.

According to the official narrative of false flag ops like Sandy Hook and Aurora, we are supposed to believe that skinny and non-muscular youths, without any discernible military training, were able to acquire expensive military gear (including armor, guns, ammunition and more), wear that gear without getting bogged down in speed, and shoot incredibly fast and accurately.

In San Bernardino, we are supposed to believe that a young mother was strong and skilled enough to participate in killing 14 and injuring 17 people while she was strapped up with body armor and holding heavy weaponry!

In these cases and more, the official story would have you believe that it’s no big deal or just a coincidence that the patsy can acquire all this high-end gear and use it so well.


False Flag Formula #6: Patsy Gets Killed, Drugged or “Suicided”

It is also part of the false flag formula to ensure that the patsy, who is earmarked before the event to take the fall, cannot speak out to rationally defend themselves. This is achieved in a number of ways. The simplest is to have the patsy kill himself or herself by committing “suicide”.



Related: Case Closed: JFK Killed After Shutting Down Rothschild’s Federal Reserve

Another favorite way is to take the patsy out in a thrilling high speed chase, which has the added benefit of drawing clueless people in through the MSM and gushingly promoting the police state. Sometimes a patsy is killed in plain sight, just because it’s so important to suppress his testimony (e.g. Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK assassination). 

A third way is to mind control and drug the patsy to such an extent that they become a zombie vegetable unable to articulate anything, as was the case with James Holmes.


False Flag Formula #7: Shooter Leaves Manifesto

In this day and age, writing a manifesto is a strange and anachronistic thing to do. Yet, for some strange reason, shooters’ manifestos seem to crop up an awful lot after mass shootings.

Conveniently for the Controllers, these manifestos provide a perfect explanation for the official narrative, and help fill in the missing (non-existent) motive for the attack – which probably pushes those on the fence over into believing the Government’s version of the event.

While the manifesto is not an element in every false flag operation, it is present in enough of them to be regarded as part of the false flag formula.


False Flag Formula #8: Evidence Gets Conveniently Destroyed

Another element of the false flag formula is the deliberate destruction of evidence, so that the Controllers can cover their tracks.



In 9/11, the scrap metal (in the smoldering ruins of the WTC towers) was immediately shipped off to China right from the start; with Sandy Hook, the entire school was demolished; in San Bernardino, the supposed landlord of the supposed shooters actually allowed MSM reporters into the suspects’ house to poke around and touch all their stuff, in complete disregard for what could be a possible crime scene!

Could it get any more blatant?


False Flag Formula #9: No Obvious Motive for the Mass Attack

Have you ever wondered why there is no obvious motive in any of these mass shootings? Crimes are supposed to be solved on the merit of motive and opportunity, yet to hide the reality of a false flag op, the MSM just lies about the motive part, and chalks it up to a deranged shooter.



Other times we are offered the flimsiest of motives, such as people going on an all-out rampage because they had a grievance with a co-worker. In San Bernardino, we were told the young mother, with a 1-year-old child, was aggressive and psychotic enough to help kill 14 and injure 17 people – at the risk of never seeing her child again!

Meanwhile, the real purveyors of these operations profit immensely from the ensuing fear, yet somehow the majority of people don’t seem to see that motive...


False Flag Formula #10: Immediate Calls for Gun Control

Gun control is obviously one of the key agendas behind all of these false flag mass shootings, since a disarmed population is far easier to exploit and manipulate than an armed one. It is an obvious aspect of the false flag formula. Sometimes gun control is even pushed in the immediate aftermath of the event when people are still in a highly emotional and suggestible state.

Take a look at the behavior of Andy Parker, who we were told was the father of a victim killed in the Virginia mass shooting of 2015.



Within hours of hearing the news of the death of his child, Parker had already contacted and talked with the Governor of Virginia, and then appeared on TV saying he would be devoting his entire life to gun control.

In a similar fashion, Richard Martinez, the alleged father of a Santa Barbara mass hooting victim, appeared on TV right after the death angrily pleading for more gun control. In both cases, the political agenda of gun control angrily dominated their reactions, rather than grief or other emotions.


False Flag Formula #11: Fake “Victims” = Crisis Actors

The above 10 points are a useful outline of the false flag formula as it pertains to mass shootings with real victims, i.e. where real people die. However, ever since the surreal Sandy Hook event, which still contains many unanswered questions, we have entered the twilight zone of the false flag hoax.

This is a term used to describe the false flag mass attacks where no one dies – where fake bodies, fake blood and fake victims are used instead. In this way, the entire operation is more tightly controlled and less messy. A hallmark of the false flag hoax is that the authorities never produce a credible piece of evidence showing an actual dead body of a victim.



Is this the same girl crying at all three massacres - Aurora, Sandy Hook and Boston?

The following 5 points relate to false flag hoaxes, and specifically to the people employed to pull them off – crisis actors. It is truly a testament to just how utterly fake our normal world is (the Matrix) that false flag ops have now descended to the level where we have to question whether the event even happened at all. 

There are organizations of crisis actors in the US (such as the IIF), and there is clear evidence crisis actors were used at Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon and many others.



Related: Charlie Hebdo: French False Flag Terror Event

Government officials have been caught using the word “actor” to describe various players in these dramas; the MSM has even resorted to calling them actors too (it was one of the buzzwords of the recent San Bernardino mass shooting).


False Flag Formula #12: “Victims” Get Killed Twice

The surreal quality of the false flag hoax reached point of absurdity when it was discovered that one of the “victims” was reportedly killed twice!

We were told that Noah Pozner was one of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting, yet his picture was also among those killed in a Pakistan Taliban attack.

Apparently the recycling of fake victims is another part of the false flag formula.


False Flag Formula #13: Families of “Victims” Have Elite or Acting Backgrounds

Is it just a coincidence that the families of mass shooting “victims” have either elite or acting backgrounds? At the Sandy Hook event, local CEO of the Newtown bank John Trentacosta (whose house was next to the Lanzas and had a lot of unusual activity occurring there the day of Sandy Hook) was connected to the New York Federal Reserve (and thus the international banking elite). 

Francine Wheeler was formerly the personal assistant of former chief Democratic National Committee fundraiser Maureen White whose husband Steven Rattner is a Wall Street investment banker and member of the Rockefeller CFR (Council on Foreign Relations)!



Related: Censorship Shock: Amazon.com Bans Investigative Book ‘Nobody Died At Sandy Hook’ Because It Disagrees With Government Version Of What Happened

It was also noteworthy at Sandy Hook how acting showed up in the resumes of so many of the key players there. Gene Rosen, David and Francine Wheeler (both professional actors) and others all had a background in acting. Father of Virginia mass shooting “victim” Andy Parker is an actor (and a politician too). This fact supports the idea that another element of the false flag formula is to watch for people with elite connections and acting backgrounds.


False Flag Formula #14: Families of “Victims” Show Little to No Emotion, and Even Snigger and Laugh

Luckily for truth seekers, the majority of crisis actors used in these false flag events are poor actors who are utterly unconvincing in the roles they play. The majority display little or no emotion after an alleged tragedy like losing a family member child to a random and violent mass shooting.

It is true that humans do vary widely with emotional response and expression. However, with many of the crisis actors, judging by their reactions, it simply strains credibility too much to believe that they have just have been through a harrowing and traumatic ordeal.



Related: The Great ‘Terrorism’ Hoaxes – from Boston to Berlin – #CrisisActors Exposed

Given the range of possible reactions to a tragedy like losing a loved one in a mass shooting, what are the chances that many of the “victims’” family members are so non-emotional, or so understanding, or so quick to forgive?

It’s shameful enough that the crisis actors playing these roles are perpetrating a monumental deception on the public, tugging at the average person’s heartstrings solely to trick them.

However, on top of that, these actors have the gall to actually laugh – to smile, snigger and giggle – while pulling off their atrocious stunts. The only conclusion to draw from this is that it must be pretty funny to get a paid gig like this fooling millions of people…


False Flag Formula #15: Families of “Victims” Receive Millions in Federal Payoffs

In the US, the land of the lawsuit, people are generally pretty fast to initiate a lawsuit if they feel they have been wronged. It is highly strange, therefore, that none of the alleged parents of the Sandy Hook event decided to sue the Government for negligence or to demand redress for any other grievance. 



Additionally, many of the alleged parents received a total of millions in unsolicited federal payouts (check out the free houses they magically got on Christmas day 2009) – that’s right, unsolicited.

The Federal Government just gave it over to them without asking! Ask yourself: is is more likely the Government would just do this out of the goodness of its heart, or that the money was more like a bribe/blackmail/payout all rolled into one, awarded to actors playing a part in a role and being sworn to silence?

Related: Sandy Hook Truth Bomb Patch Media's Blatant LIES About Jonathan Reich


Conclusion: Use the 15 Elements of the False Flag Formula to Be More Aware

These are 15 elements I noticed forming the false flag formula. There may well be more.

Meanwhile, use the knowledge you have of the false flag formula to become more aware, wise and hip to the deception, so that the next time it unfolds (as it surely will), you will be among those that spot the fakery, rather than among those who are too scared, shell-shocked and gullible to do anything other than buy the official narrative.


Related: Articles:

Turkish Nightclub a False Flag: Mistaken Prime Suspect? Turkish Nightclub’s Security ‘Taken Over’ Prior to Attack

Saudi survivor: There were three killers at Reina nightclub on New Year

Convenient? ‘Active Shooter’ Kills 5 in Fort Lauderdale, CNN Claims Voices in His Head ‘Told Him to Join ISIS’

Florida Governor Reaches Out to Trump “Multiple Times” after Shooting – Bypasses Lame Duck Obama

Berlin False Flag Faked - Video Hoax

Analysis by Ole Dammegard of Norway Breivik Massacre as a False Flag Event




Ian R Crane - The False Flag Agenda

President-elect Trump has issued a statement following his briefing with various intelligence agencies over the Russian hacking allegations, seemingly rejecting the Democrats' charges that it was the Russians alone and that it had any effect on the outcome of the election.

Not quite the "stunning" reaction that Nancy Pelosi had.

The mainstream media is very disappointed...




Related: Hacker Guccifer Calls US Allegations Against Russia 'Fake Cyber War'

That served two purposes: 1) it provided the operative with legitimate cover; and 2) it allowed the operative’s government to use the operatives “media” position to shape public opinion in the host country.

Related: Ten basic forms of fake news used by major media

Brainwash them, in other words, with propaganda.

But in truth, that kind of propagandizing and brainwashing is also done by institutional media pushing a specific political agenda. Think back to our recently concluded presidential election cycle and what the “mainstream media” did in a failed effort to get its anointed candidate, Hillary Clinton, elected.

They lied, made up narratives out of whole cloth, and tried to smear her opponent, now-President-elect Donald J. Trump, in an effort to defeat him.

As reported by The Waking Times, experts denote a number of techniques that are used by the establishment media to brainwash the public and create/control the daily narrative.


The Mainstream Media Are the Real Purveyors of ‘Fake News’

Edward Bernays is known as the father of modern propaganda. He was the first to use social engineering techniques spread via the mass media of the day. In the early 20th century, he laid the groundwork for what became cultural programming at the societal level by assisting in the transformation of a mostly rural, agrarian-based American society into a homogenized culture of devout statists and consumers.

The principles he developed and implemented have greatly influenced the growth of American culture, how it grew and the direction it took.

Having picked up Bernays’ torch in the 21st century, several experts on modern brainwashing, mind control and propaganda have recently given insight into their craft.

Think about what is ailing our countries today, in terms of societal problems. There is corruption of so-called “grassroots movements” that are actually funded by Left-wing billionaires such as George Soros and Bill Gates, and yet the movements are portrayed by the establishment media very often as spontaneous and locally brewed, but all are attempting to achieve a specific social and political result.

The efforts of these allegedly organic groups are amplified many times their size by the media, which gives them both credence and a megaphone with which to shout their views. And what do they shout?

America is racist, bigoted, homophobic, unfair, politically broken, etc. Never are the calls for unity or praise for our country given any attention at all.



Related: Former CBS Reporter Exposes Media Lies, Internet Shills & Astroturfing

Much of this is done via a technique known as “astroturfing.” Seasoned veteran investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson explains;

“Astroturf is a perversion of grassroots. Astroturf is when political, corporate or other special interests disguise themselves and publish blogs, start Facebook and twitter accounts, publish ads, letters to the editor, or simply post comments online, to try to fool you into thinking an independent or grassroots movement is speaking.”

Another technique used is subliminal messaging. This is a cornerstone of mind control, and when a person is unwittingly bombarded with cleverly concealed information, an emotion can be trigged leaving a person’s intellect and better judgment subjugated in favor of a mental process like fear or sexual desire.

You may never consciously understand or realize why you begin to adopt certain behaviors, products of lifestyles, but the attraction is nonetheless real and that manifests itself through actual personal choices.

In a 2011 documentary called Programming the Nation, filmmaker, graphic artist and digital media producer Jeff Warrick, a former advertising sales rep, provided examples of how subliminal messaging and other subconscious methods are employed by ad executives and other media to create cultural ‘norms’ and social programs like consumerism, materialization of women’s bodies, health choices and the glorification of violence.

“Could such techniques really be contributing to a variety of social, political and economic problems currently present in our culture? Such as obesity, anorexia, and other eating disorders? The ongoing war on terror? And what about the ever-increasing amounts of debt, that has tightened its grip on a growing percentage of the population?” the documentary says.

Other techniques include fake news - yes, by the mainstream media - omission (not covering an issue as though it wasn’t real or important); slanting coverage through the use of biased “expert” sources; and publishing falsified data and science as though it were legitimate.


Related Articles:

The Great "Fake News" Scare Of 1530

Ty Simpson: Taking Down David Brock and His Illicit Fake News Empire – Citizens Audit

CNN Runs Fake News Story About Russia Closing Anglo-American School in Moscow

Washington Post can’t stop faking the news: U.S. electrical grid “penetration” story a complete fabrication

FakeNews: Russia hacks Vermont infrastructure! - Old Ukrainian malware found instead

Majority Are Still Falling for Fake News

Julian Assange with Sean Hannity – Russians Did Not Hack the US Election

EU Creating ‘Fake News’ Watchdogs for Upcoming Elections

Fake News Mainstream media Has Half of Hillary's Supporters Believing Russia Stole Election

Two of the world’s most evil people – Bill Gates and George Soros – behind Facebook’s news censorship agenda

Julian Assange: Media Is Colluding with Democrat Party in America

Media blackout on death of NATO auditor – was he assassinated to cover-up NATO’s black budget?

Donald Trump Endorses Rand Paul’s ‘Audit The Fed’ Bill

DNC Refused to Give FBI Access to Its Servers - Gave Access to a DNC Consultant Tied to Anti-Russia Group

CIA Training Handbook: How to Fake Intelligence Plus Case Study on Faking Russians Hacking US Election

A Case Study in the Creation of False News

The “Fake News” Saga: From Official Policy to Mainstream American Discourse, Propaganda in the Making

New Twist on Fake News Russian Hacking Story

“The Russian Hacking”: How the “Leaks” From Clinton and the DNC Happened

Trump Fires All Obama Politically Appointed Ambassadors Effective Inauguration Day

Obama has announced new sanctions on Russia based on unsubstantiated charges by the CIA that the Russian government influenced the outcome of the US presidential election with “malicious cyber-enabled activities.”

“Tools and infrastructure used by Russian intelligence services to compromise and exploit networks and infrastructure associated with the recent U.S. election, as well as a range of U.S. government, political and private sector entities.”

Moreover, the report begins with this disclaimer: “DISCLAIMER: This report is provided ‘as is’ for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within.”

Related: GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

In other words, the report not only provides no evidence of the use of the Russian tools and infrastructure in order to influence the US presidential election, the report will not even warrant the correctness of its description of Russian capabilities.



Related: 18 Major Scandals in Obama’s ‘Scandal-Free’ Presidency

Thus the DHS report makes it completely clear that the Obama regime has no evidential basis for its allegations on the basis of which it has imposed more sanctions on Russia.

What is going on here?

First there is the question of the legality of the sanctions even if there were evidence. I am not certain, but I think that sanctions require the action of a body, such as the UN Security Council, and cannot legally be imposed unilaterally by one country. Additionally, it is unclear why Obama is calling the expulsion of Russian diplomats “sanctions.”

No other country has to do likewise. During the Cold War when diplomats were expelled for spying, it was not called “sanctions.” Sanctions imply more than unilateral or bilateral expulsions of diplomats.

Second, it is clear that Obama, the CIA, and the New York Times are fully aware that the allegation is false. It is also clear that if the CIA actually believes the allegation, the intelligence agency is totally incompetent and cannot be believed on any subject.

Third, President Trump can rescind the sanctions in 21 days, a third reason that the sanctions are ridiculous.

So why are President Obama, the CIA, and the New York Times making charges that they know are false and for which they have not produced a shred of evidence?



Related: Soros Launches Plan to Bring Down US and Israel

One obvious answer is that the neoconized Obama regime is desperate to ruin US-Russian relations past the point that Trump can repair them. As the New York Times puts it;

“Mr. Obama’s actions clearly create a problem for Mr. Trump.” The question the New York Times says, is whether Trump “stands with his democratic allies on Capitol Hill or his authoritarian friend in the Kremlin.”

Can Trump’s foreign policy be controlled by false allegations?

According to the New York Times, Trump has relented and agreed to being briefed by the CIA about the Russian hacking now that Republicans such as Paul Ryan, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham have lined up with Obama and the CIA in accepting charges for which no evidence has been presented.

However, a briefing without evidence would seem simply to further discredit the CIA in Trump’s eyes.

As I have emphasized in my columns, facts no longer have a role in the United States and its empire. Allegations alone suffice, whether in court cases, interrogation centers, foreign and domestic policies, or classrooms.

The US even bases its military invasions on false allegations - “weapons of mass destruction.” Indeed, the entirely of US foreign policy since the Clinton regime has been based on nothing but false allegations.

The Russian government should have learned by now, but perhaps Moscow still thinks that facts matter in Washington’s decisions.

Possibly we should consider that more is going on than meets the eye. Perhaps the propaganda about the Russian cyber threat to democracy is being used to prepare American and/or European populations for an incident.

The CIA has morphed into a “deep state” that uses disinformation and propaganda to align decisions of Congress, the executive branch, and foreign governments with secret behind-the-scenes agendas. Many books, such as Stephen Kinzer’s The Brothers and Douglas Valentine’s CIA As Organized Crime have described some of these secret agendas.



Related: Truman’s True Warning on the CIA

In order to deter Trump from restoring normal relations with Russia, an incident would have to be severe and irreversible. Rather than accept defeat for their agenda of US world hegemony, the neoconservatives are prepared to take high risks. The willingness to take risks is demonstrated by the public effort of the CIA Director to discredit the president-elect.

As expected, Putin’s response to the latest provocation is low key as the “sanctions” appear to be meaningless on the surface.

Related: Stephen Lendman Reports President Putin’s Response To Obama’s New Sanctions

However, in the event that something dangerous is below the surface, the Russian government might want to consider putting its military forces on alert.


Related Articles:

Stephen Lendman Reports President Putin’s Response To Obama’s New Sanctions

Obama Retaliates Against Russians Over Purported Cyberattack, But Is There a Double Standard?

Russia sanctions ‘childish, petulant & pointless revenge for Clinton loss’ – UK’s ex-Syria envoy

Russia Responds To Obama On Expelled Diplomats: New Hostile Steps Will Receive An Answer

Plane with Russian diplomats expelled from US lands in Moscow

Washington’s Intent is Economic Destabilization and “Regime Change” In Venezuela

Rescuing Boris - TIME Magazine, 1996

Russia to Obama: Put up or Shut Up

HuffPo Turns On Obama: He Presided Over The "Destruction Of The Democratic Party"

Refugees Surge 86% Year on Year: Ahead of Trump Presidency Obama Rushes Muslim Refugees into US

Benjamin Netanyahu SLAMS Obama and Kerry In Fiery Response

Seven Ways Obama Is Trying To Sabotage The Trump Administration

President Barack Obama’s final weeks in office seem dedicated to setting foreign and domestic policy on fire to make life as difficult as possible on his successor, Donald Trump.



Here are some of the biggest mousetraps Obama scattered across the White House floor on his way out:

Related: Assange: Obama Is ‘Obviously Trying To Delegitimize Trump’ - Wikileaks founder says source of email hack is '1000% Not Russia'

1. Betraying Israel at the United Nations: Obama’s refusal to block a United Nations vote against Israel, his administration’s shadowy machinations to bring that ugly motion to the floor, and Secretary of State John Kerry’s long-winded broadside against Israel will leave President Trump with a massive political crisis in the Middle East, and quite possibly a security crisis, if terror groups and their “political wings” are emboldened by the rebuke of Israel.

Obama’s Israel maneuver also damages American credibility, teaching would-be allies that the United States is not the best friend to have. America’s erstwhile battlefield allies in Syria can teach the same lesson, assuming any of them are left alive to take the podium.

This comes at the very moment aspiring hegemons in China and Russia are showing their allies how Beijing and Moscow will go to the mat for them.



Related: Obama Publishes $7.4 BILLION Worth Of Regulations In One Night

Obama’s team thinks it was clever to saddle Trump with an international edict the U.S. president cannot easily reverse. They might not have thought this all the way through, because some of the options that are available to Trump could leave internationalists, and Palestinian leaders, cursing Barack Obama’s memory.

Note that even some commentators friendly to Obama, and sources within the Obama Administration itself, have described the Israel vote as a deliberate act of sabotage aimed at Trump, because Obama is “alarmed” by some of Trump’s appointees.


2. A New Cold War With Russia: After eight years of relentlessly mocking anyone who said Russia was a major geopolitical threat to the United States (most famously including his 2012 presidential opponent, Mitt Romney) Barack Obama suddenly realized: “You know what? Russia is a major threat!”

He also awoke to the dangers of cyber-warfare, after an entire presidency of treating electronic espionage as a purely political problem to be minimized and spun away, because taking it seriously made him look bad. Who can forget how Obama left victims of the OPM hack twisting in the wind for weeks, because the administration didn’t want to admit how serious the attack was?

But then a top Democrat political operative fell for a crude phishing scam, and the Democratic National Committee got hacked, so Obama… well, he still didn’t take cyber-espionage seriously.

He slapped the snooze bar again, because as one anonymous official put it, they thought Hillary Clinton was a cinch to win the 2016 election, “so they were willing to kick the can down the road.”

No, it was Hillary Clinton’s loss in the election, and the desperate push to damage President-elect Trump’s legitimacy, that made the president who politely ignored China hacking 25 million American citizens’ private data get tough on information security.

Tucker Carlson Destroys Leftist on Russian Election Hacking Claims

Related Articles:

Hannity Has Sit-Down Interview with Julian Assange – “It Was Not Russia”

Robert Parry: John V. Whitbeck on the Criminal Insanity of the US Establishment Claiming Russians Hacked the Election When It as the Establishment That Lost Under Its Own Byzantine Fraud-Friendly Rules…

Intelligence Insider: Russian Hack Story Is A Giant Hoax

Robert Steele in Defence and Intelligence Norway: The Russians Did Not “Hack” the US Election – a Few Facts from a Former CIA Spy





Until now, states involved in cyber-espionage never got anything worse than a few carefully-chosen words of sour disapproval from the expiring administration, but the Russkies received a sprinkling of sanctions, and 35 diplomats were expelled.

Russia responded by unleashing an army of ducks and trolls from the depths of the Kremlin. The New Cold War is only a few days old, and it’s already weirder than the old one was.

Presumably Obama thinks he’s maneuvered Trump into a position that will make whatever rapprochement he might have entertained with Moscow more difficult, or at least more politically costly for the new President.



Related: Buoyant Putin and Sinking Western Mis-Leaders

The end result might be easier relations between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and a lingering memory of how little Barack Obama cared about cybersecurity until it was politically expedient for him to freak out.

3. Ban on Oil Drilling: An overt act of sabotage directed at the American economy itself, leaving an especially heavy bootprint on Alaska. Smug administration flacks spent the past couple of weeks assuring media talking heads that Obama’s unprecedented abuse of an obscure law was impossible for his successor to reverse.

It’s like they stayed up all night, looking for executive actions that can’t be undone by the new President four weeks later.

(Amusingly, Obama dropped this bomb on our energy sector just a few weeks after publicly advising Trump not to abuse executive orders.)

It’s likely that legions of lawyers will battle throughout 2017, and perhaps beyond, to determine if Obama’s “latest poke at Trump” (as Politico put it) really is irreversible. What a lovely parting gift from the departing President to the country that elected him twice: a pile of gigantic wealth-destroying lawsuits!

4. National-Monument Land Grab: The other theoretically irreversible presidential edict discovered by Obama’s munchkins is the ability to designate national monuments. Another 1.65 million acres in Utah and Nevada was yanked off the market in the last week of December, bring Obama’s Antiquities Act acreage up to an unprecedented 553 million acres.



Related: Obama seizes Bundy Ranch area in massive last minute land grab

"This arrogant act by a lame duck president will not stand. I will work tirelessly with Congress and the incoming Trump administration to honor the will of the people of Utah and undo this designation,” thundered Senator Mike Lee of Utah.

Sixty-five percent of his state is now under the wise and compassionate environmental protection of the same government that turned the Colorado River into a toxic-waste dump.

5. Eliminating the National Immigration Registry: Just in case Trump got any ideas about using it as the basis for the “enhanced vetting” he has promised for immigrants from terrorist-infested regions, the Obama administration killed a long-dormant program called NSEERS that once committed the unforgivable politically-incorrect sin of tracking military-age males from violently unstable Muslim-majority countries.

It’s highly debatable whether the NSEERS program was of any practical use. When it pulled the plug, the Department of Homeland Security noted that the post-9/11 program called for collecting data that is now routinely collected for most foreign visitors, along with more sophisticated biometric information.

Almost everyone saw the elimination of these roles as a purely symbolic act - i.e. political sabotage directed at the incoming President.

6. The Great Guantanamo Jailbreak: After paying little more than lip service to his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison for much of his presidency, Obama went into overdrive in his last years, transferring over 150 detainees. A shocking number of them ended up back on the battlefield.

Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) of the House Foreign Affairs Committee wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed this week to sound the alarm about Obama’s “midnight push to empty out Guantanamo.” 

“The White House has repeatedly released detainees to countries it knew lacked the intent and capability to keep the detainees from returning to terrorism. The results have been deadly,” Royce wrote, challenging the wisdom of such Obama administration brainstorms as dropping al-Qaeda’s top bomb maker into Bosnia, a country with “limited security services” but plenty of radical mosques and unemployed military-age males.

Related: 2017: The Year Of Microchipping Americans. The Law Was Just Passed

Royce’s committee has been investigating allegations the administration tried to pay the bomb-maker $100,000 to refrain from passing his deadly skills along to eager apprentices. Hunting down the rest of the transferred prisoners who transferred themselves right back into the global jihad will be a job for the Trump administration.

7. Depicting Trump’s Election as a Disaster: Let’s not forget Obama’s acts of rhetorical sabotage, such as describing Trump’s presidential campaign as a crime against American class and racial harmony, or his wife wailing that all hope was lost for America’s children. Trump himself has taken note of the “many inflammatory President Obama statements and roadblocks.”

It’s hard to remember a previous instance of the outgoing president attacking the legitimacy of his successor this way, especially during the transition, before the new chief executive has actually done anything.

And it’s probably not over yet. The time for big executive orders is growing short, but Obama is always just one day away from calling a press conference and saying something else that will make the transition more difficult.

Alex Jones To Announce Who Really Hacked the DNC

Of course he can still talk all he wants after January 20th, and he’s given every indication he won’t follow the dignified path of his predecessors and allow the new president time to chart his own course, but there’s no substitute for the bully pulpit of the presidency.

The timber of Barack Obama’s political voice will be very different on January 21st than it was on January 19th. More likely than not, he’ll use it before he loses it.

Related: Obama’s legacy of debt and disease: National debt doubles in just eight years while 10.7 million more Americans now on food stamps to buy cancer-causing junk foods

The Top 10 Most Outrageous Science Hoaxes Of 2016
January 2 2017 | From: NaturalNews

Science hoaxes were running rampant throughout 2016, pushed by the fakestream media (CNN, WashPost, NYT, etc.) alongside complicit government organizations working in collusion with dishonest corporations steeped in scientific fraud (Monsanto, Big Pharma, etc.).



2016 saw more science hoaxes than a typical year, with the media placing special emphasis on the Zika virus terror campaign (rooted in total scientific hucksterism) and more climate change propaganda (all based on fraudulently altered data).

Related: Seeding Doubt: How Self-Appointed Guardians Of “Sound Science” Tip The Scales Toward Industry

In every case, those pushing the science frauds claimed to have a divine monopoly on “science” while declaring all opposing views to be “unscientific.”

In this way, much of the “science” in today’s corrupt society has really become nothing more than a cult of scientism, complete with “faith” in the correctness of socially-reinforced beliefs while exercising instant rejection of evidence that contradicts the fairy tale narratives of the science elite.

Sadly, “science” in 2016 functioned more like a priesthood of dogmatists fervently demanding the obedient worship of their unassailable assumptions. On every issue that matters, data were thrown out the window and replaced with fraud.



Related: The Cult Of 'Scientism' Explained: How Scientific Claims Behind Cancer, Vaccines, Psychiatric Drugs And GMOs Are Nothing More Than Corporate-Funded Science Fraud

To drive home the fraud, the scientifically illiterate lamestream media catapulted the propaganda to new heights, even while remaining completely oblivious to the laughably false “science” they were promoting.

Here, I offer a summary of the most outrageous science hoaxes of 2016, along with a few links where you can explore more. By the way, the video on the “Cicret bracelet” invention that claims to turn your arm into a mobile device touchscreen is also a complete fraudulent hoax that has fooled millions of people, and I cover that in detail at the bottom of this article.

My primary message for 2017 is to stop believing in all the fake science being pushed by media, governments, academia and corporate liars.


Science Hoax #1: “Scientific” Political Polling

Through the entire year, we were all subjected to an endless onslaught of so-called “scientific” political polls that almost universally showed Hillary Clinton would win the election.

All the “scientific” polls were wrong, it turns out. (And yes, I called all this well before the election, on the record.)

What we now know is that the word “scientific” was slapped onto these fraudulent polls to try to give them an aura of credibility when, in reality, they were all fabricated or distorted to give Hillary Clinton the appearance of certain victory.

But guess what? All the experts were wrong. But how is that possible if all these polls were “scientific” as claimed? Are the pollsters now telling us that science is broken?

Or maybe, just maybe, they were making s##t up all along and there wasn’t any real “science” behind the “scientific” claim in the first place.


Science Hoax #2: The Zika Virus Terror Campaign

2016 saw the rolling out of an elaborate media-fronted Zika terror campaign designed to scare the entire country into ridiculously believing that mosquito bites would cause millions of women in America to give birth to babies with shrunken heads.

Yeah, I know, it sounds like something a Batman villain would threaten to unleash in Gotham City. “Pay me one million dollars or all your babies will be born with shrunken heads! Mwuah hah hah!”



Related: Who’s Behind The Zika Virus Outbreak & Fearmongering?

But, alas, the American sheeple bought the medical science hoax hook, line and sinker. Belief in the Zika virus microcephaly hoax was so deeply embedded in the psyche of the nation that even when the Washington Post published a story admitting there was no link after all, the vast majority of so-called “scientists” and doctors still believe the hoax!

So, for the record, I’ll say it again in the hopes of educating all the scientifically illiterate “scientists” who still don’t understand actual facts: The original wave of shrunken heads in Brazil was caused by a larvacide chemical that was dumped into the water supply, not by the Zika virus alone.

The “Zika apocalypse” predicted by all the doctors, scientists and TV talking heads simply did not materialize. And when evidence contradicts your theory, you have to start questioning your theory. Otherwise, you aren’t a scientist. You’re just a petty fool.


Science Hoax #3: The Flint Michigan Lead Poisoning Cover-Up

In order to poison a million black children with brain-damaging lead, the U.S. EPA masterminded a large-scale science fraud that deliberately altered heavy metals testing results for the Flint, Michigan water supply.

Eventually, a few of the science scapegoats were charged with felony crimes for engaging in a conspiracy to alter water quality test data, but no one from the EPA was ever charged or prosecuted for their role in the scheme. (This also proves, by the way, that conspiracies are quite real and very much alive in our society right now.)

The result of all this was the mass poisoning of mostly African-American children with a toxic heavy metal that’s well known to damage cognitive function and impede learning.What a great way to raise more democrats!

It’s all part of the new “science” of keeping the sheeple dumbed down so they will keep voting for corrupt criminals like Hillary Clinton.

Instead of “let them eat cake,” the new progressive Jon Podesta version is, “Let them drink lead!”


Science Hoax #4: The Banning of GMO Labeling Nationwide by Scientifically Illiterate Republicans

In the name of “science,” Republican lawmakers passed the so-called “DARK Act” to outlaw honest food labeling of genetically engineered foods.

Apparently, Republicans believe that knowledge is a dangerous thing in the hands of consumers, therefore preventing people from knowing what they’re eating is the best solution.



Related: Monsanto Promoting Worldwide Infertility? + Academic GMO Shills Exposed: Fraud & Collusion With Monsanto

This was all accomplished via an unholy alliance among biotech corporate giants (like Monsanto) and right-leaning lawmakers, most of whom have never met a toxic chemical they didn’t absolutely love.

Notably, while Democrats are passing local laws that criminalize Big Gulp sodas, Republicans are blocking labeling laws as a way to say, “If you don’t SEE the poison on the label, it doesn’t actually count!”

Keeping consumers in the dark is now the official science policy of the federal government.

How’s that for transparency?


Science Hoax #5: Climate Change Data Fraud

Democrats have their own science fraud, of course, and there’s no better example than global warming / climate change.

An analysis of climate data reveals that 100% of U.S. warming has been faked by altering temperature data.



Related: Climate Scare Declared Officially Over- Error In Model Calculations Discovered

To the great frustration of celebritards like Matt Damon, the data don’t show any warming at all unless you “cook” the numbers first.

This means “climate change science” is actually more like climate change alchemy, which isn’t science at all. It’s more like Tarot cards mixed with voodoo blended with AlGoratotalitaritopian idiocy.

Note to intelligent people: If the world were really warming, they wouldn’t have to alter the temperature data, would they?


Science Hoax #6: Abortion Organ Harvesting for “Scientific Research”

According to leftists, chopping up living human babies who have just been forcibly “birthed” in order to harvest their organs and brains isn’t unethical at all. Nope, it’s a tremendous advancement for scientific research, you see.

Organ harvesting isn’t just limited to places like Communist China and North Korea: The practice is alive and well in America, too. But in the U.S., it takes on a genocidal milestone because most abortions are carried out on black babies… yep, the very same black babies that were also intentionally poisoned by the EPA in Flint, Michigan (see above).

Hmmm… there seems to be a pattern in all this, but I can’t quite put my finger on it… but it definitely seems to have something to do with killing as many black babies as possible while labeling it all “science.”

It’s noteworthy to remember that Adolf Hitler’s eugenics programs were also conducted under the umbrella of “science.”

It seems not that much has changed in almost 80 years… except that instead of Jews being exterminated by the millions, it’s now black babies being exterminated by the millions while democrats demand an open borders human blitzkrieg to replace them all with socialist-leaning illegal aliens who are uninformed enough to vote for leftists.


Science Hoax #7: The California Vaccine Mandate

Another large-scale science hoax that also happens to place a disproportionate burden on African-American babies is the California “medical police state” vaccine mandate pushed by California’s own “Mercury Joker” Dr. Richard Pan.

After receiving bribes from vaccine makers, the “medical child molesting” California state senator Richard Pan took part in a media-backed medical terrorism campaign against California’s citizens, attempting to scare everyone into falsely believing that the best way to protect the health of children is to inject them with mercury (instead of, I don’t know, maybe feeding them nutritious foods and vitamin D).



Related: Doctors Who Discovered Cancer Enzymes In Vaccines All Found Murdered

The entire vaccine mandate was founded on blatantly fraudulent quack science claims fronted by the child-murdering vaccine industry, which continues to absurdly insist that vaccines pose zero risk to children (i.e. claiming they do not harm a single child…ever). The claim is, of course, rooted in sheer delusion. But that’s also what passes for “legislation” in California.

We can only hope California’s #Calexit effort succeeds soon, so we can build a wall around California and stop the contagious epidemic of lunacy from spreading Eastward.


Science Hoax #8: Janet Yellen’s Libtardtopia Economics “Science”

No summary of science quackery would be complete without bringing in the subject of “economics.” Yes, it qualifies as a science… at least if you ask the economists. (If you ask non-economists, it qualifies mostly as voodoo.)

Nevertheless, according to Janet Yellen and the decrepit “wizards of collapse” who are currently steering the global debt Titanic directly into an array of large shards of icebergs, the best way to keep a global economy in balance is to create endless new money until the whole thing explodes, at which point the system collapses to “equilibrium” where everybody starves roughly the same amount (i.e. Venezuela).

To demonstrate this brilliant hypothesis, Yellen and her crotchety academic cohorts have been busy pumping trillions of fiat currency dollars into the pockets of their bankster pals while raising interest rates to accelerate the debt avalanche apocalypse timetable.



Ideally, they hope to trigger the whole thing to come crashing down sometime during Trump’s first term. Then, they’ll all express total shock and dismay while pleading to the press that we should all “Bring back Obama because he was a monetary genius!” (Or perhaps a radical Muslim sleeper cell working for the communists to subvert America, but that’s another hilarious satire article altogether.)

As a cherry on top, Obama also doubled the national debt in just eight years, all while handing Iran a path to nuclear weapons, dissing Israel, subverting American culture, gutting the U.S. military and secretly telling his Russian counterparts he would drastically reduce U.S. nuclear capabilities.

Yes indeed, the “dream team” of Obama, Clinton and Yellen has pulled off what America’s worst enemies could not: The near-complete financial paralysis of the U.S. economy all while claiming “Everything is awesome!”

Thank God all the pensions across the country are fully funded, huh? Or that would be a real disaster.


Science Hoax #9: Transgenderism and the Lunatic Liberal “Theory of Spontaneous Genetic Transmutation”

2016 also saw many gullible people being convinced to believe that a biological man can instantly transform himself into a biological woman by declaring himself to be a woman.

At least one “journalist” even claimed that a transgendered man could become pregnant after declaring himself to be a woman. Yes, science education in America has utterly collapsed at this point, replaced with liberal P.C. insanity and delusional college lesson plans rooted in “feelings” rather than physical reality.

Across most of today’s gender-confused college-educated youth, belief in the laws of genetic expression have been replaced by belief that a person’s sex is a “choice.” It’s no longer permutations, phenotypes and genotypes… it’s now metrosexual, generation snowflake, pu##ified blathering idiocy with a diploma, “safe space” cry rooms and $100K in student debt.

Sorry to burst their bubble of stupid, but sex classification isn’t a personal choice. A simple genetic test shows you either have XY chromosomes, XX chromosomes, or the far more rare extra-X-or-Y chromosome defect which typically leads to serious physical and mental defects (including infertility).

Somebody please direct gender confused college snowflakes to the National Human Genome Research Institutes fact sheet page on chromosomes.

According to today’s college snowflakes, the National Human Genome Research Institute is a “purveyor of HATE” because their fact sheet page says all these mean things about chromosomal defects:

“Inheriting too many or not enough copies of sex chromosomes can lead to serious problems. For example, females who have extra copies of the X chromosome are usually taller than average and some have mental retardation. Males with more than one X chromosome have Klinefelter syndrome, which is a condition characterized by tall stature and, often, impaired fertility. Another syndrome caused by imbalance in the number of sex chromosomes is Turner syndrome. Women with Turner have one X chromosome only. They are very short, usually do not undergo puberty and some may have kidney or heart problems.”

Thus, there are only two sexes in the biology of all mammals: Male and female. And no, you don’t get to change them up just because you think it’s trendy to be a gender-confused metrosexual snowflake.

This doesn’t mean you can’t be gay, by the way. Gay men still realize they’re men. They just choose male partners instead of female partners. On the spectrum of personal freedom, I say people should be able to partner with whomever they want.

Gay or straight, it’s all a personal choice as far as I’m concerned, because it’s none of my business… and stop shoving your sexual preferences in my face, all you militant gay mafia activists.

Just be gay and be done with it. The “gay rights” war is over, and you already won it. Stop being bullies and thinking you’re still oppressed victims.

Marry whomever you want, but just #STFU about it already. Obama already lit up the White House with rainbows, for God’s sake.

But to say that yesterday you were a male, but today you’re a female… now that’s just technically bonkers. You’re not really a female. You’re a male impersonating a female and that’s it. Bruce Jenner, take note: You are not a woman, no matter how much you want to impersonate one.

The greatest insult in all this was when some fashion magazine voted Bruce Jenner “Woman of the Year,” instantly declaring that this guy who impersonates a woman is a better woman than all the other women. Dudes with dongs out-women the women?

And that’s celebrated by the women? Yeah, it’s insane. And all these same “progressive” women also insist that pervs with dongs should be able to invade women’s restrooms, too, because that’s “embracing gender identity and inclusiveness” blabbity blah blah.

Get a grip, people. Check your drawers and briefly fondle your hardware. If it’s junk, you’re a dude, and stop playing with it already. If it isn’t, you’re a woman. If you have both, go ask a doctor to run a genetic test and find out if you have ovaries.


Science Hoax #10: Every Science “Journalist” Working for the Fakestream Media

This is more of a collection of hoaxes rather than a single hoax. It all centers around the hilarious fact that most science “journalists” are scientifically illiterate morons who only think they understand science.

I remember reading a science column in a major U.S. publication that claimed cell phones could run on water. (Yeah, I know. I tried that by dropping my cell phone into a glass of water, but it turned off all the power for some strange reason. Maybe I need “special” water?)

There has also been a wave of hilariously stupid media coverage for this bracelet computing project called “Cicret” that ridiculously claims to “turn your arm into a touchscreen.”

The entire video promoting this “Cicret” bracelet is a complete fraud. Racking up almost 25 million views on Youtube, the video shown here is accomplished purely with special effects overlays. The bracelet does not exist and cannot exist as depicted in the video for the simple reason that light cannot bend around the curvature of your arm.

Incredibly, countless “journalists” across the mainstream media fell for this total hoax, stupidly believing that a hi-res touchscreen rendition can be projected onto your skin from a bracelet that barely sits just a few millimeters above your skin in the first place.

Question for brain dead “science” journalists: Do you really believe light rays from the Cicret can bend around your wrist and then magically bounce off skin that isn’t in a direct line of sight with the bracelet projector?

Seriously, you have to be incredibly stupid (or scientifically illiterate) to think the Cicret bracelet, as depicted in the videos, can actually function. But that sure didn’t stop publications from all across the world pushing the hype and convincing their readers that this “cool tech” was real.



Related: Western Media Credibility In Free Fall Collapse: Case In Point: UN Peace Council: The US Media Is Lying To The American people. The War In Syria Is Not A Civil War, It's A Proxy Invasion By The United States

And yes, the younger people are on social media these days, the more gullible they are, too. So special effects “viral videos” can be very successful at raising millions of dollars in “Kickstarter” funds for devices that cannot ever exist because they violate the laws of physics.

It’s a whole new kind of financial scam that’s legal because it only extracts money from people who are too stupid enough to believe the viral videos. In summary, “Kickstarter” viral videos are a tax on stupid progressives the same way that the lotto is a tax on stupid conservatives.

And now that I’ve thoroughly offended everyone, let’s wrap all this up…


2016 Was a Bad Year For the Credibility of Real Science… Let’s Hope 2017 is Better

In summary, 2016 saw the pushing of numerous science hoaxes by the fakestream media, governments, academic institutions and corporate propaganda whores like Forbes.com. (Oh, and we can’t leave out the actual whores running SNOPES, who were exposed as prostitutes and fetish bloggers.)

So how do we rescue science in 2017? It’s simple: We start using science to tell the truth instead of allowing governments and corporations to use science to lie.

A few fundamental scientific truths I’d like to see finally embraced in 2017 would include:

Yes, there is extraterrestrial intelligence in the universe.

Yes, there is (or was) microbial life on Mars.

Yes, human consciousness is non-material and not located in the physical brain.

Yes, vaccines cause autism.

Yes, flu shots still contain mercury.

Yes, there are many anti-cancer foods that can help prevent cancer.

Yes, transgenderism is a mental disorder, not a “choice.”

Yes, glyphosate causes cancer.

Yes, DEET is toxic to human neurology.

Yes, genetically engineered crops seeds are a genuine threat to the environment and the food supply.

Yes, water can retain non-physical properties that subtly alter its interactions with living systems.

No, carbon dioxide is not the enemy of mankind.

No, chemotherapy does not “cure” cancer. It often makes it worse.

No, harvesting organs from living human babies is not “ethical science.”

No, science journals are not unbiased, objective arbiters of truth.

No, “scientific” political polls are not reliable. They are bunk.

No, the “experts” are not as smart as they think they are. Mostly, they’re idiots who have attained high positions of “persistent idiocy” in academia or government, and their job is to protect the idiocy for as long as possible, making sure no one overthrows idiocy with intelligence.

Senate Quietly Passes The "Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act" & Obama Bans Free Speech In The Dead Of Night
December 30 2016 | From: ZeroHedge/ Infowars / Various

While we wait to see if and when the Senate will pass (and president will sign) Bill  "H.R. 6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017", which was passed by the House at the end of November with an overwhelming majority and which seeks to crack down on websites suspected of conducting Russian propaganda.



President Trump is going to have an awful lot of un-doing to do...

It calls for the US government to "counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence… carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly,” another, perhaps even more dangerous and limiting to civil rights and freedom of speech bill passed on December 8.

Related: Gun Control FAIL: Mass Shootings Surge 240% During Obama’s Presidency

Recall that as we reported in early June;

"A bill to implement the U.S.’ very own de facto Ministry of Truth has been quietly introduced in Congress. As with any legislation attempting to dodge the public spotlight the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016 marks a further curtailment of press freedom and another avenue to stultify avenues of accurate information. Introduced by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu, H.R. 5181 seeks a “whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions” to counter “foreign disinformation and manipulation,” which they believe threaten the world’s “security and stability.”

Related: "Ministry of Truth" now active in America

Also called the Countering Information Warfare Act of 2016 (S. 2692), when introduced in March by Sen. Rob Portman, the legislation represents a dramatic return to Cold War-era government propaganda battles.

"These countries spend vast sums of money on advanced broadcast and digital media capabilities, targeted campaigns, funding of foreign political movements, and other efforts to influence key audiences and populations,” Portman explained, adding that while the U.S. spends a relatively small amount on its Voice of America, the Kremlin provides enormous funding for its news organization, RT. “Surprisingly,” Portman continued, “there is currently no single U.S. governmental agency or department charged with the national level development, integration and synchronization of whole-of-government strategies to counter foreign propaganda and disinformation.”

Fast forward to Thursday, December 8, when the "Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act" passed in the Senate, quietly inserted inside the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Conference Report.

Here is the full statement issued by the generously funded Senator Rob Portman (R- Ohio) on the passage of a bill that further chips away at press liberties in the US, and which sets the stage for future witch hunts and website shutdowns, purely as a result of an accusation that any one media outlet or site is considered as a source of "disinformation and propaganda" and is shut down by the government.



How North Korea and the Obama regime Both Use the Same Mind Control Techniques Against Their Citizens

This eye-opening new video details how U.S. government propaganda under Obama parallels the socially-reinforced mind control tactics used in North Korea, a radical left-wing dictatorship rooted in the cult worship of its leader.



Related: Obama Signs Portman-Murphy Kill Alt-Media Bill into Law Under X’mas Cover

Barack Obama is simply a more polite rendition of the same social control tyranny used by Kim Jong-Un. Angela Merkel, in many ways, invokes the same tactics of disinformation and linguistic social control, deliberately lying to the people of Germany in order to control them while the country is systematically destroyed to appease globalist interests.

As I also state in the video, most Americans would be obedient Kim Jong-Un worshipers if they had grown up in North Korea.

The vast majority of individuals in western society today falsely believe they are independent thinkers, but that’s only because they’ve been indoctrinated under a system of mind control that’s very good at pretending to be based on “freedom.”

Watch the full video to see for yourself. (This video was recorded before the Nov. 8 Trump election victory, which provides a least some glimmer of hope that the globalist agenda might be slowed.)

Senate Passes Major Portman-Murphy Counter-Propaganda Bill as Part of NDAA

Portman/Murphy Bill Promotes Coordinated Strategy to Defend America, Allies Against Propaganda and Disinformation from Russia, China & Others

U.S. Senators Rob Portman (R-OH) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) today announced that their Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act – legislation designed to help American allies counter foreign government propaganda from Russia, China, and other nations – has passed the Senate as part of the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Conference Report.



Related: How the Crackdown on Patriots Will Occur: Dissent Will Become Unthinkable

The bipartisan bill, which was introduced by Senators Portman and Murphy in March, will improve the ability of the United States to counter foreign propaganda and disinformation by establishing an interagency center housed at the State Department to coordinate and synchronize counter-propaganda efforts throughout the U.S. government.

To support these efforts, the bill also creates a grant program for NGOs, think tanks, civil society and other experts outside government who are engaged in counter-propaganda related work. This will better leverage existing expertise and empower local communities to defend themselves from foreign manipulation.

“The passage of this bill in the Senate today takes us one critical step closer to effectively confronting the extensive, and destabilizing, foreign propaganda and disinformation operations being waged against us. While the propaganda and disinformation threat has grown, the U.S. government has been asleep at the wheel. Today we are finally signaling that enough is enough; the United States will no longer sit on the sidelines. We are going to confront this threat head-on,” said Senator Portman. “With the help of this bipartisan bill, the disinformation and propaganda used against our allies and our interests will fail.” “Congress has taken a big step in fighting back against fake news and propaganda from countries like Russia. When the president signs this bill into law, the United States will finally have a dedicated set of tools and resources to confront our adversaries’ widespread efforts to spread false narratives that undermine democratic institutions and compromise America’s foreign policy goals,” said Murphy. “I’m proud of what Senator Portman and I accomplished here because it’s long past time for the U.S. to get off the sidelines and confront these growing threats.”

NOTE: The bipartisan Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act is organized around two main priorities to help achieve the goal of combatting the constantly evolving threat of foreign disinformation.


They are as follows:

The first priority is developing a whole-of-government strategy for countering foreign propaganda and disinformation. The bill would increase the authority, resources, and mandate of the Global Engagement Center to include state actors like Russia and China in addition to violent extremists.

The Center will be led by the State Department, but with the active senior level participation of the Department of Defense, USAID, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the Intelligence Community, and other relevant agencies. The Center will develop, integrate, and synchronize whole-of-government initiatives to expose and counter foreign disinformation operations and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support U.S. allies and interests.

Second, the legislation seeks to leverage expertise from outside government to create more adaptive and responsive U.S. strategy options. The legislation establishes a fund to help train local journalists and provide grants and contracts to NGOs, civil society organizations, think tanks, private sector companies, media organizations, and other experts outside the U.S. government with experience in identifying and analyzing the latest trends in foreign government disinformation techniques.

This fund will complement and support the Center’s role by integrating capabilities and expertise available outside the U.S. government into the strategy-making process. It will also empower a decentralized network of private sector experts and integrate their expertise into the strategy-making process.

In other words, the Act will:

i) Greenlight the government to crack down with impunity against any media property it deems "propaganda", and

ii) Provide substantial amounts of money fund an army of "local journalist" counterpropaganda, to make sure the government's own fake news drowns that of the still free "fringes."

So while packaged politely in a veneer of "countering disinformation and propaganda", the bill, once signed by Obama, will effectively give the government a full mandate to punish, shut down or otherwise prosecute, any website it deems offensive and a source of "foreign government propaganda from Russia, China or other nations."

And since there is no formal way of proving whether or not there is indeed a foreign propaganda sponsor, all that will be sufficient to eliminate any "dissenting" website, will be the government's word against that of the website. One can be confident that the US government will almost certainly prevail in every single time.




Obama Bans Free Speech In The Dead Of Night

America adopts Soviet style media controls.

By slipping through the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, President Obama has signed the “Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act” into law, effectively putting all speech under federal control.





Related: So Called ‘Fake News’ Could be a Thing of the Past

The research is hard to ignore, vaccines can trigger autoimmunity with a laundry list of diseases to follow. With harmful and toxic metals as some vaccine ingredients, who is susceptible and which individuals are more at risk?

But something strange is happening in the world of immunology lately and a small evidence of it is that the Godfather of Autoimmunology is pointing to vaccines - specifically, some of their ingredients including the toxic metal aluminum – as a significant contributor to the growing global epidemic of autoimmune diseases.



Related: Trump: Vaccines Cause Autism And Will Be Investigated

The bigger evidence is a huge body of research that’s poured in in the past 15 years, and particularly in the past five years. Take for example, a recent article published in the journal Pharmacological Research in which Shoenfeld and colleagues issue unprecedented guidelines naming four categories of people who are most at risk for vaccine-induced autoimmunity.

“On one hand,” vaccines prevent infections which can trigger autoimmunity, say the paper’s authors, Alessandra Soriano, of the Department of Clinical Medicine and Rheumatology at the Campus Bio-Medico University in Rome, Gideon Nesher, of the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem and Shoenfeld, founder and head of the Zabludowicz Center of Autoimmune Diseases in the Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer.

He is also editor of three medical journals and author of more than 1,500 research papers across the spectrum of medical journalism and founder of the International Congress on Autoimmunology.

“On the other hand, many reports that describe post-vaccination autoimmunity strongly suggest that vaccines can indeed trigger autoimmunity. Defined autoimmune diseases that may occur following vaccinations include arthritis, lupus (systemic lupus erythematosus, SLE) diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia, vasculitis, dermatomyosiositis, Guillain-Barre syndrome and demyelinating disorders. Almost all types of vaccines have been reported to be associated with the onset of ASIA.”

Related: Herd immunity is a myth: Why un-vaccinated children are not a threat to others

ASIA – or Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants (also known as Shoenfeld’s syndrome) - first appeared in the Journal of Autoimmunology four years ago.

It is an umbrella term for a collection of similar symptoms, including Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, that result after exposure to an adjuvant – an environmental agent including common vaccine ingredients that stimulate the immune system.

Since then an enormous body of research, using ASIA as a paradigm, has begun to unravel the mystery of how environmental toxins, particularly the metal aluminum used in vaccines, can trigger an immune system chain reaction in susceptible individuals and may lead to overt autoimmune disease.

Autoimmune disease results when the body’s system meant to attack foreign invaders turns instead to attack part of the body it belongs to (auto is Greek for self). If the immune system is like a national defence system, antibodies are like drones programmed to recognize a certain type of invader (a bacteria say) and to destroy them or mark them for destruction by other special forces.



Autoantibodies are like drones that are misidentifying a component of the human body and have launched a sustained attack on it. If they mistakenly target a component of the conductive sheath around neurons, for example, nerve impulses stop conducting properly, muscles go into spasm and coordination fails; multiple sclerosis results.

If autoantibodies erroneously focus on joint tissue; rheumatoid arthritis results. If they target the islets of Langerhans in the pancreas, Type 1 diabetes, and so on

“Throughout our lifetime the normal immune system walks a fine line between preserving normal immune reactions and developing autoimmune diseases,” says the paper. “The healthy immune system is tolerant to self-antigens. When self-tolerance is disturbed, dysregulation of the immune system follows, resulting in emergence of an autoimmune disease. Vaccination is one of the conditions that may disturb this homeostasis in susceptible individuals, resulting in autoimmune phenomena and ASIA.”

Who is “susceptible” is the subject of the paper entitled, “Predicting post-vaccination autoimmunity: Who might be at risk?” It lists four categories of people:

1. Those who have had a previous autoimmune reaction to a vaccine

2. Anyone with a medical history of autoimmunity

3. Patients with a history of allergic reactions

4. Anyone at high risk of developing autoimmune disease including anyone with a family history of autoimmunity, presence of autoantibodies which are detectable by blood tests and other factors including low vitamin D and smoking.


Previous Reaction

Regarding those who have had a previous adverse reaction to vaccines, the paper cites five relevant studies including the case of a death of a teenage girl six months following her third Gardasil injection against HPV virus. 



Related: Gardasil Fully Exposed: HPV Vaccine Being Tested on Infants Has Killed, Permanently Injured Thousands

She had experienced a range of symptoms shortly after her first dose, including dizziness, numbness and tingling in her hands, and memory lapses. After her second injection, she developed “intermittent arm weakness, frequent tiredness requiring daytime naps,” worse tingling, night sweats, chest pain and palpitations.

A full autopsy was unrevealing but blood and spleen tissue analysis revealed HPV-16 L1 gene DNA fragments - matching the DNA found in vials of the Gardasil vaccine against cervical cancer - “thus implicating the vaccine as a causal factor.”

The DNA fragments had also been found to be “complexed with the aluminum adjuvant” which, according to the report, have been shown to persist for up to 8 to 10 years causing chronic immune system stimulation.

“Although data is limited,” Shoenfeld and his colleagues concluded, “it seems preferable that individuals with prior autoimmune or autoimmune-like reactions to vaccinations, should not be immunized, at least not with the same type of vaccine.”

Established Autoimmune Condition

The second group which the paper cites for vaccine exemption is patients with “established autoimmune conditions.” Vaccines don’t work so well in them, say Shoenfeld and his colleagues, and they are at “risk for flares following vaccination.”

Inoculations that contain live viruses including chickenpox, yellow fever and the measles, mumps and rubella triple vaccine (MMR) are “generally contraindicated” for people with autoimmune conditions because of  the risk of “uncontrolled viral replication.” But inactivated vaccines are not such a good idea either because they usually contain the added ingredient aluminum, linked to autoimmunity.

The immunologists describe recent studies in which patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease given the influenza vaccine (without aluminum) suffered more joint pain and fever than controls and whose levels of autoantibodies (the drones that attack self)  increased after receiving the flu vaccine.



Related: How The CDC And Vaccine Court Create An Epidemic Of Autism

What’s more, they developed new types of autoantibodies that weren’t present before the vaccines, and those persisted. As the presence of autoantibodies can be predictive of developing autoimmune disease in patients without symptoms, even years ahead of disease onset, this is troubling to those who understand immunology.

A number of studies claim vaccines are safe for the “overwhelming majority of patients with established autoimmune diseases,” the study allows, but they only looked at rheumatoid arthritis and lupus and not at severe and active cases so “the potential benefit of vaccination should be weighed against its potential risk,” they cautioned.


Patients With a History of Allergy

Vaccine trials have usually excluded “vulnerable” individuals - only extremely healthy individuals with no allergies are recruited. It’s a “selection bias,” say Soriano and Shoenfeld, and has likely resulted in serious adverse events being “considerably underestimated” in “real life where vaccines are mandated to all individuals regardless of their susceptibility.”

The true incidence of allergic reactions to vaccines, normally estimated at between one in 50,000 to one in a million doses, is probably much higher and particularly where gelatin or egg proteins are on the ingredients list, they say.

There’s a long list of vaccine ingredients that are potential allergens: besides the infectious agents themselves, there are those from hen’s egg, horse serum, baker’s yeast, numerous antibiotics, formaldehyde and lactose, as well “inadvertent” ingredients such as latex.



Related: New Study Confirms That Mercury Is Linked to Autism

People’s allergic histories have to be taken before vaccination say the researchers. But some signs of reaction don’t show up until after the shot.